Posted on 08/26/2010 6:28:21 PM PDT by DesertRenegade
Same-sex marriage is back as a front-burner issue in American politics.
First, on August 4, a federal judge in San Francisco held that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, striking down part of the California Constitution defining marriage as one man and one woman. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ordered an expedited schedule to consider this case, with arguments to be held in December.
Second, former RNC chairman and 2004 Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman came out this week, announcing he’s homosexual, and pushing the Republican Party to support the homosexual-rights agenda. Republicans leaders are beginning to weigh in on where they stand, including on the agenda’s centerpiece: Redefining marriage.
The Republican Party has an official position on same-sex marriage. It’s found in the 2008 GOP platform, which is the clear and uncontestable Republican position until the 2012 convention. When one of your authors (Ken Blackwell) was serving as vice chairman of the GOP Platform Committee, there was a singular focus on producing a party platform that fully reflects the vast majority of Republican Party members.
The GOP platform could not be more explicit: Marriage is the union of one man and one woman. The fundamental institution of human civilization should be preserved as it has been known through the entirety of American history and Western civilization. Supporters of same-sex marriage had the full opportunity to make their case to the party. They made it, and they lost.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
You’re exactly right.
Run these punks off.
This must be how the ‘pubs have decided to “blow” their opportunity in November.
Conservatives need to be loud on this issue. The homosexual agenda is unacceptable.
Once our society endorses or legitimizes one male worshipping the hairy filthy fecal waste canal of another male, we are done for. No society has lasted long after accepting this kind of mindboggling degeneracy. It just shows how far we have fallen that it is even a topic of public discussion. That is why I describe their lifestyle in such frank terms - because once you realize their mindset it produces a natural revulsion.
No one in common American society supports this degeneracy. NO ONE. Why do we let a handful of morally defunct pockets of cancer in a few of our nation’s coastal cities dictate the structure of our society?
I believe they should go the route of supporting “civil unions”, where the gay folks can have all the same legal recognition/status as married people.
If the left and the fags reject it, they will appear ‘extreme’ to the mindless middle, and it would paint the left into a corner where they will be seen as extreme, and settling for nothing short of the destruction of traditional marriage. If the left accepts the idea of “civil unions”, then the issue goes away, and it will leave many in the gay wing pissed and the dems divided.
It would be a win/win.
Yes. It does. I wouldn't have imagined just 20 years ago that this would be something we'd have to fight.
Marriage is a word that describes a relationship between man and woman, it wasn’t a word that was seeking a definition.
A lot of people sound as if they are giving up. It’s like a tidal wave—a tidal wave of crap, to be sure, but still overwhelming.
Eventually, probably sooner rather than later, the Supremes will hear one of these cases, and it (homosexual marriage) will become the law of the land, again just like abortion. From then on, it will only be talked about during election season, and only in campaign fund-raising letters, political rallies and conventions - again, just like abortion.
Homosexual marriage does fail at the ballot box. But, it only fails at the ballot box because blacks and Latinos vote against it, pretty overwhelmingly. Unfortunately, those exact same blacks and Latinos ONLY vote for pro-homosexual politicians who nominate or confirm pro-homosexual judges and justices.
That's just the practical political reality. Eventual homosexual marriage in America is as predictable as death and taxes
To begin with, they will NOT be satisfied with "civil unions".
Secondly, WHY would you even CONSIDER special rights for deviant behavior?! Homosexuality is a behavior. Since when do we give "rights" based on aberrant behavior that is unacceptable to society?
Two of the same cannot mate. It isn't possible.
People give up on this and we’ve lost it all.
“Those committed to Biblical Christianity would stay home on election day”
Probably so, and they would be flaming A-holes for doing so. We are likely at our last chance to stop a literal socialist revolution and the total economic destruction of America. We better all be on the team in November, even if our pet peeve isnt dealt with. Once the Marxist economy is stopped, then we can hold republicans accountable for a much wider range of issues.
But this in not the election for the “one issue voter”, unless the issue is socialism. Staying home stamping your feet absolutely makes Obama’s day.
It’s irrelevant because the GOP is not stupid (did i just say that, let me take that back). They don’t like to brag about it, but they realize that Americans have had 31 Referendums on Homosexual Marriage and it was defeated 31 times...even in lala land of California.
So, they go where the votes are.
I understand your position, but there are issues that are far greater in importance than either Socialism or Marxism. What does it profit a man to gain the whole world, but lose his soul?
Letting Democrats win isn’t the answer. Try to vote for conservatives and hold the Repubs feet to the fire. Liberals never listen to us. But Repubs are more receptive. And voting out incumbents WILL get attention.
Well, you’d better tell everyone who will listen that abortions and homosexuality are national killers, because they are.
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.