>>> “My party is formally against homosexual marriage,” said av Rana. “If I were to participate in the official dinner, it would be the same as saying that I support a union that is contrary to nature and condemned by the Bible.
We dealt with this issue years ago, when people would throw around the idiotic notion that the photo of Rumsfield shaking hands with Saddam constituted an endorsement. It didn’t. Diplomacy requires good manners.
This is just childish grandstanding. A state dinner is a matter of protocol and diplomacy, not morality. If Winston Churchill could dine with Stalin, this twit could break bread with the leader of a friendly democratic state and trading partner. The Faroes has been humiliated.
From the omission of detail, I infer his political party is not one of the more substantive ones. If he was somebody who mattered, the story would almost certainly drive this point home.
What's wrong with the bully pulpit?
Should he have dinner with Roman Polanski? Everybody has a line that they feel they shouldn’t cross. Where we draw the line is an individuals choice. He feels that in good conscience he can’t break bread with the prime minister and it’s wife then I guess he will have to live with that choice. I am torn in a way.
I have coworkers who are lesbians and
date. One of their nieces plays volleyball on my daughters team and I am cordial to her and greet her in front of my children with a smile and with no animus. However I also told them that they are lesbians and that I think that they have a disordered life that is not in keeping with our beliefs that I do work with them and they are good workers and have never pushed their lifestyle choice onto us.
I suppose if you represent a country it must make your obligations and choices a lot more difficult.
In a sane world, I would agree. In today's world, we see folks using any slightest opening to put a wedge in and to strat inferring what is not true. In this case, the man says he is anti homosexual marriage and nobody can construe it as anything else because he was principled enough to follow up with actions that support his words.
Go lecture Obama on protocol. He’s the guy if you recall who disinvited Reverend Franklin Graham from the very Prayer Breakfast he was the Chairman of.
BS
Then when do you make a principled stand?
When you are the last one?
Churchill abd Stalin had to use each other, and put a positive spin on the realtionship. This man sees no purpose to doing that; I don’t think he needs Iceland’s help to repel an invasion. I’m with him; they can legislate all they want, in the end it is an abomination and I will always be treated as such. My children have learned the same; we don’t question God’s word.
Drivel. One just does not associate with trash.
Iceland has become trashy like Massachusetts.
Only by honoring a mentally and sexually dysfunctional head of state. I would say Iceland resembles Sodom and we KNOW what happened to them.
For someone who presumes to lecture others on matters of protocol and diplomacy you demonstrate incredible ignorance. It was a state dinner. The diplomatic obligations rest with the respective heads of state, in this case the Prime Minister of Denmark and the Prime Minister of Iceland. They are the ones required to subordinate their personal or political ideologies in order to conduct state business.
Mr. av Rana is not the head of state of Denmark. He is merely a leader of one of their political parties. If he and his party disagree with the persona or policies of the visiting leader of another country it is entirely proper for them to refuse to attend a function honoring that person.
Those without spine tend to be spineless -this politcian has a spine...
I respect those who walk the talk I am tired of RINOs