Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cornyn defends decision to speak to gay Republican group
Houston Chronicle ^ | September 16, 2010

Posted on 09/16/2010 2:12:35 PM PDT by BradtotheBone

Texas Sen. John Cornyn is defending his decision to speak at an upcoming meeting of the Log Cabin Republicans, an organization of gay Republicans.

In a letter faxed yesterday to Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, a socially conservative group, Cornyn said he believes in "working together where possible" with other Republicans, even when he may disagree with them.

As chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Cornyn is charged with electing as many Republicans as possible to the Senate. He has been under attack in recent weeks from some hardline conservatives who believe that he has recruited too many moderates in the 2010 primary season — including some, like Mike Castle of Delaware, who lost in primaries to insurgent conservatives.

Cornyn said he accepted the invitation because the Log Cabin Republicans are "committed to defeat Senate Democrats this November." He said they "stand for fiscal discipline, limited government and a strong national defense. We may not agree on several key issues, but we do agree that every committee in the United States Senate should be chaired by a Republican."

Cornyn's commitment to appear at the event has been known publicly since July, but Perkins wrote him a letter on Monday raising questions about the Texan's plans.

In a polite response, Cornyn recites his social conservative bona fides and notes that "my record on social issues is well-established."

(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.chron.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; logcabinrepublicans; rinos; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

1 posted on 09/16/2010 2:12:36 PM PDT by BradtotheBone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

Cornyn should not negotiate with political terrorists. These deviants should not be tolerated.


2 posted on 09/16/2010 2:13:55 PM PDT by freedomwarrior998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone
Sort of like Governor Perry speaking to La Raza. Some things just wont fly if you expect a conservative base to vote for you. IMHO, these types of actions and cow-towing to individuals and groups with such divergent positions is a dog that wont hunt...and really never did.

November is coming.

3 posted on 09/16/2010 2:17:49 PM PDT by Jeff Head (Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone
He was quick to pull funds from O'Donnell, but he is going to speak at a homosexual meeting!

This guy has to go!

4 posted on 09/16/2010 2:18:44 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (When the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn (Pr.29:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

Cornyn should take Rove along. Something tells me that Karl and the Log Cabin boys have more than a little in common.


5 posted on 09/16/2010 2:19:22 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone
Senator John Cornholio?


6 posted on 09/16/2010 2:22:40 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

Is this the same group that Ann Coulter agreed to speak to?


7 posted on 09/16/2010 2:28:34 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

Slash and burn.


8 posted on 09/16/2010 2:32:06 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
Is this the same group that Ann Coulter agreed to speak to?

Yes, and she was a moron for doing it as well.

9 posted on 09/16/2010 2:41:41 PM PDT by frogjerk (I believe in unicorns, fairies and pro-life Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone
Might as well go appease the butt bandits, Cornhole, cuz there is nothing you can do or say that is going get conservatives on your side.


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

10 posted on 09/16/2010 2:42:43 PM PDT by The Comedian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone; 185JHP; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Agitate; Albion Wilde; AliVeritas; Antoninus; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

Cornyn said he accepted the invitation because the Log Cabin Republicans are "committed to defeat Senate Democrats this November." He said they "stand for fiscal discipline, limited government and a strong national defense. We may not agree on several key issues, but we do agree that every committee in the United States Senate should be chaired by a Republican."

No. We think every committee should be headed by conservatives. Republicans have become liberals. Homosexuals do not stand for fiscal discipline. They want to push their agenda through and their agenda costs money. Taxpayer money. Cornyn, We the People don't want government to give deviancy their stamp of approval!

11 posted on 09/16/2010 3:17:58 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Lots of hating in this thread. Not all homosexuals think alike politically. I say, good for you, John Cornyn.


12 posted on 09/16/2010 3:28:58 PM PDT by micmac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: micmac
Lots of hating in this thread.

Good gravy a hate speech pusher. Get over it. We don't want the homosexual agenda pushed on us.

13 posted on 09/16/2010 3:40:04 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone
Texas Sen. John Cornyn is defending his decision to speak at an upcoming meeting of the Log Cabin Republicans, an organization of gay Republicans a homosexually conservative group.

In a letter faxed yesterday to Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, a socially truly conservative group, Cornyn said he believes in "working together where possible" with other Republicans, even when he may disagree with them.

There that's better -see how weird the obvious reality looks when the lipstick is removed from the pig...

What is conservative about having big government impose homosexual sex premised morality upon the citizenry?

Further, what is conservative about big government mandating a social value upon homosexual sex practice -something society considers morally bankrupt without any social redeeming value?

Finally, what is conservative about big government mandating that society fund the promotion, privilege, recognition, and the reward of homosexual sex premised couplings that at best contribute nothing of value to society?

Answer to all: NOTHING!

Get a clue Cornyn -you do not compromise principles for political expedience!

14 posted on 09/16/2010 3:41:38 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
Is this the same group that Ann Coulter agreed to speak to?

No. Coulter is speaking to GOProud. Yet another "special rights" group.

15 posted on 09/16/2010 3:42:45 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: micmac
Lots of hating in this thread. Not all homosexuals think alike politically. I say, good for you, John Cornyn.

Check with your 0zero provided therapist -you may be suffering from conservativephobia...

16 posted on 09/16/2010 3:44:09 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: All
I can't say I'm surprised... He is always been one of those ___ ____s in the "middle" and we know how we call those things in the "middle." right? :)

I did like the guy at one time... a long time ago but as a SOCIAL-CONSERVATIVE I'm disappointed in him.

17 posted on 09/16/2010 3:44:30 PM PDT by ElPatriota (The SILENCE of the Catholic Church in protecting our culture from perversion is ** DEAFENING **)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

When can we get rid of him?

Such a Rino he is..


18 posted on 09/16/2010 3:47:41 PM PDT by Rightly Biased (Do you know how awkward it is to have a political argument with a naked man?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: micmac
How many elections will you win if you alienate the base and gerrymander the social conservatives? You want to tell the 90% of your supporters to eschew their principles and religion to appease and placate the 1% that are perverts and their liberal/libertarian supporters?

And you wonder why there's a liberal super majority in power..

Here's the facts.. ALL 31 of the 31 states that held referendum on this issue soundly rejected perverted marriage. Even the uber liberal dark blue peoples socialist utopian republic of California told the perverts NO TWICE!

Mr Cornyn needs to worry about Conservatives, stop pandering to queers and illegal aliens and wake up and smell the frickin TEA! He's out the next time he comes up for election. We Conservative Texans are going to kick him and Kay "Bailout" Hutchinson's liberal RINO butts so far out of their senate seats they're going to land in Mexico without their passport.. Good riddance!

19 posted on 09/16/2010 3:54:33 PM PDT by DirtyHarryY2K (The Tree of Liberty is long overdue for its natural manure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

>> Good gravy a hate speech pusher. Get over it. We don’t want the homosexual agenda pushed on us.<<

So speaking to them is pushing their agenda on us how?

You don’t believe that they should be allowed at all right? Who’s pushing agenda?

If you want your freedoms you had better let them have their freedoms as long as it doesn’t harm you.


20 posted on 09/16/2010 4:38:19 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
You don’t believe that they should be allowed at all right? Who’s pushing agenda?

I would say that YOU are TRYING to push an agenda; however, failing miserably...

Sticking with facts rather than attempting to subvert the discussion; e.g. attributing false claims to an individual --WOULD leave your 'freedom' argument with what? NOTHING...

21 posted on 09/16/2010 4:45:03 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Comment #22 Removed by Moderator

To: CynicalBear
You don’t believe that they should be allowed at all right?

Quote where I said that.

If you want your freedoms you had better let them have their freedoms as long as it doesn’t harm you.

It does harm me. It harms society to give special rights to a group based solely on deviant behavior. And it takes away my right to disagree with their illness.

And your talking points are homosexual agenda talking points.

23 posted on 09/16/2010 5:06:20 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: micmac

Here are two links to the Log Cabin Republicans [sic] site.

Read their agenda. It is not conservative any more than the GOProud agenda.

Both organizations are simply homosexual agenda pushing organizations, trying to get the Republican party on board.

http://online.logcabin.org/issues/

http://online.logcabin.org/news_views/news_011805.html

Just like the GOProud organization, it’s “all gay all the time”. NOT conservative. Any Republican sucking up to either organization should be voted out of office if they are elected and fired if they are hired.

The reason for the LCR name is the lie that Abraham Lincoln was a homosexual, which he was not. So these deviants are liars and militant homosexuals, and most of them vote for Dems anyway.


24 posted on 09/16/2010 5:23:56 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
If you want your freedoms you had better let them have their freedoms as long as it doesn’t harm you.

Could you re-phrase that sentence so it is clear and understandable?

In particular, what "freedoms" do you think people here do not want homosexuals to have? Being able to vote? Work? Ride on public transportation? Make wills?

Or these: Join the military? Marry? Adopt or foster children? Teach kids in school that "gay is good"?

25 posted on 09/16/2010 5:28:33 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

You don’t believe that they should be allowed at all right?
>>Quote where I said that.<<

Did you notice the question mark? It means I was asking. Quotes would typically mean I was quoting you.
If you want your freedoms you had better let them have their freedoms as long as it doesn’t harm you.

>>It does harm me. It harms society to give special rights to a group based solely on deviant behavior. And it takes away my right to disagree with their illness. <<

We lost that battle back in the 60s. “Society” allowed the abhorrent behavior by not being stronger holding prayer in schools, strong family values, and prayer around the dinner table. You cannot legislate morals. On the other hand it certainly does not take away your right to disagree with their illness. (I used your word illness even though I do not agree that it is an illness. It’s a deviant behavior.
>>And your talking points are homosexual agenda talking points. <<

My talking points on freedom of private behavior is no more a homosexual agenda then my defense of your freedom to disagree with their private lifestyle.


26 posted on 09/16/2010 5:28:39 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
My talking points on freedom of private behavior is no more a homosexual agenda then my defense of your freedom to disagree with their private lifestyle.

Private behavior is not a public issue for debate.

Only when a behavior is a put forth as a pertinent premise related to an issue is "private behavior" relevant for discussion.

Just because one can hit themselves in the head with a hammer or eat dog poop "privately" does not make such practices of value to society...

The issue becomes an issue when such practices are pushed by their practitioners who seek acceptance as normal what society rejects as disordered and of no value to society...

The issue really becomes a contentious issue when the practitioners of such practices push to have big government impose acceptance upon society and privilege at the expense of society these practices that society rejects as disordered and of no value to society...

Do YOU call that freedom?

Speaking of "private behavior" --the "Log Cabin Republicans" really could just as well be called the "We Hit Ourselves With Hammers Republicans" or "Dog Poop Eating Republicans" -are you getting a clue yet?

Private behavior is no longer private when it is placed in the public domain and is premise for promoting political initiatives...

Now, what are you promoting here -"private behavior" freedom which we already have and as such require no promotion of OR are you promoting the homosexual agenda?

27 posted on 09/16/2010 6:00:45 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Did you notice the question mark? It means I was asking.

No you weren't.

You cannot legislate morals.

This has nothing to do with "legislating" morals. It has everything to do with them asking for special rights. As of now, they have the same rights as everyone else. They want special rights.

My talking points on freedom of private behavior

I don't care what they do in private. But teaching in schools that homosexuality is normal is not private. Demanding the "right" for two of the same to "marry" is not private. Demanding to be openly homosexual and serve in the military is not private.

28 posted on 09/16/2010 6:11:07 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

As you may have read in my previous post. I think homosexuality is an abhorrent behavior. I will reference God’s dealing with Sodom and Gomorrah as to my attitude.

However, in this country the freedoms given by the constitution demand that we, if we want our own freedom to have the ten commandments in court buildings, openly pray in public buildings such as schools, and all of the other freedoms we want, must allow others freedom as well as long as it does not infringe on our liberty or freedom.

That being said, you will agree with me that this country has gone well beyond removing or restricting the gay community from gathering through legislation. That change must come from within the Churches, homes, and schools. Given that even many churches have embraced the homosexual community I believe the overall battle has been lost on any great scale. If the Churches don’t get back to Biblical principles that family will not and thus society will not.

That all leaves us in the same situation as Noah found himself and Job found himself.

The thread we are in is on someone speaking to a group of individuals with whom we disagree. My contention was simply that he has the right to speak to that group and that does not necessarily mean he agrees with their lifestyle.

My bottom line is that we can not change a society unless we get back to a Spiritual base that starts in the Church or the individual and at this point the Churches are not doing the job as it seems to me.


29 posted on 09/16/2010 6:46:56 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

>> I don’t care what they do in private. But teaching in schools that homosexuality is normal is not private. Demanding the “right” for two of the same to “marry” is not private. Demanding to be openly homosexual and serve in the military is not private<<

I agree with you on all of those points. Thus, my children did not go to public schools. Marriage is a Church institution and Churches now sanction it. Military is still a voluntary organization.

Never have I disagreed with you that homosexuality is an abhorrent behavior. All of that does not change the fact that they have the right to assemble in this country and Cornyn has the right to speak to them.

You and I do not disagree in our view of homosexuality. We disagree on how to deal with it. I believe that Constitutionally we are stuck. The changes that need to be made is in our Churches view and practice or nothing will change in society, only get worse.


30 posted on 09/16/2010 6:57:45 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
All of that does not change the fact that they have the right to assemble in this country

No one said otherwise.

and Cornyn has the right to speak to them.

Homosexual "rights" are being pushed. Hard. This is absolutely the wrong time for an elected official to be speaking to a deviant group in his official capacity. Especially one that claims to be a conservative. It sends the wrong message.

Cornyn has screwed up big time lately. With Murkowski and O'Donnell. He referred to Tea Partiers as peons. He cannot claim to be a conservative and court liberal Republicans. We ARE to judge those that govern us and Cornyn fails.

We disagree on how to deal with it. I believe that Constitutionally we are stuck.

If you are implying that deviants have the Constitutional right to Marriage etc, you are wrong.

31 posted on 09/16/2010 7:11:17 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Your postings combined here do not seem cogent in my opinion. Maybe you should think about and reconcile your many feelings before arguing on the subject.

FIRST -freedom is endowed by the Creator -not the Constitution...

The Constitution guarantees freedom to practice religion without limit -it does not guarantee homosexual sex. There is no comparison between homosexual sex and religious practice nor is religious liberty threatened as a right to be lost if homosexual sex returns to the closet it came from...

As far as the discussion: If you think the battle is lost -why fight? If you think freedom trumps God why discuss God? If you think this is only about private behavior then why do we discuss it as if it is not private?

If a politician wants to align with groups pushing the homosexual agenda that is fine for him -he can sacrifice HIS principles and become corrupted in hopes of getting that bigger tent and more POWER (it works so well for populist collectives like the Dems who are nothing but an unprincipled mob)... Anyway, citizens that do not agree with him doing this CAN disagree with it and vote his *ss out! There is nothing wrong disagreeing with him if he leans RINO -suggesting this might endanger freedom or that religious liberty is it stake is ludicrous...

32 posted on 09/16/2010 7:13:30 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

>>There is no comparison between homosexual sex and religious practice<<

Are you kidding me? The Bible specifically condemns homosexuality. Reference Sodom and Gamorah.

I may not be explaining myself well. I believe that what you want to accomplish has to start in the Church. If we do not get back to Biblical principals there is nothing we can accomplish legislatively that will work.

Never have I said we should “give up”. I have said that if we do not change the way that churches deal with issues like homosexuality we will never change society as a whole.

Inalienable rights come from God, they are protected in this country by the Constitution.

Btw: if you are not a born again Christian non of this will make any sense to you anyway.


33 posted on 09/16/2010 7:25:19 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

>>If you are implying that deviants have the Constitutional right to Marriage etc, you are wrong.<<

Find in the Constitution that marriage is even in the purview of the Constitution. Marriage was instituted by God as it tells us in the Bible. It’s the Churches that have fallen down on this issue.

Oh, and don’t get me wrong. I am not a Cornyn fan by any means. As for his sending the wrong message, I would just say that Cornyn, from what I can tell, hasn’t shown me that he is even a true Christian. We can’t expect Christian behavior from someone who doesn’t exhibit Christian beliefs.

Therein lies the whole issue, as I see it, with Christine O’Donnell. She, as I can tell, is a true Christian and look at the vitriol being sent her way. Even by conservatives. You could also put in that group Sarah Palin and perhaps Glen Beck although I have issues with the Mormon part.


34 posted on 09/16/2010 7:35:46 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Find in the Constitution that marriage is even in the purview of the Constitution.

It is not. And again, homosexuals have the same rights that everyone has. They want extra rights. That's not in the Constitution either. It states that all are equal. Homosexuals disagree. They want special privileges. What we're saying is "No". Cornyn, by speaking to them is giving the appearance of approval. I'm not ok with that. I'm also not a peon. But he IS an elitist jerk. And wrong on this issue.

35 posted on 09/16/2010 7:43:53 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Given our conversation I thought you may be interested in this one.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2590644/posts?page=1


36 posted on 09/16/2010 7:44:13 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
I may not be explaining myself well. I believe that what you want to accomplish has to start in the Church. If we do not get back to Biblical principals there is nothing we can accomplish legislatively that will work.

Communication is a two way street -so, I will take at least half the blame...

I would agree with your point in general that principles must have a firm foundation; otherwise, they are like leaves blowing in the wind -when wind direction changes so do principles without foundation. The principle(s) Cornyn advocates here seem be blowing in the wind.

Maybe, if Cornyn would specifically state what exactly he disagrees with "them" about and how exactly he hopes to accomplish gaining conservative votes from supposed conservatives that would supposedly vote conservative anyway then what is left unsaid would become clear?

An obvious question is -if this just a conservative initiative and is not about advancing the homosexual agenda then why is it all about meeting a group that promotes the homosexual agenda?

37 posted on 09/16/2010 7:44:50 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

One more step down the slippery slope.


38 posted on 09/16/2010 7:48:09 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

>>Maybe, if Cornyn would specifically state what exactly he disagrees with “them” about<<

That’s the key!!!! From what I have seen of Cornyn I’m doubtful that he has the moral foundation needed. While I don’t think that he is going there to advance the homosexual agenda neither can I say he isn’t but I doubt it.

Given the revelations lately of the pervasiveness of the homosexual lifestyle in Washington allegedly going all the way to the top I wonder any more.

Oh, have you seen this one. It’s the slippery slope I’m afraid.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2590644/posts?page=1


39 posted on 09/16/2010 7:50:55 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

>>One more step down the slippery slope.<<

And this one a “Church”.

I suspect we may be in the situation that Noah and Job found themselves in.


40 posted on 09/16/2010 7:54:09 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Except that I believe this time is the last.


41 posted on 09/16/2010 8:06:25 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone
I'll bet all freepers have a gay person in their family or extended family OR a neighbor, coworker etc....

while I think "gay-ism" ...my new word...is abnormal and deviant, I can not hate people I know who are gay....

if we are truely conservative and believe in the constitution, then these people have a right to live in this country too....and the right to speak to legislators....

we're getting pretty petty lately.....no one is perfect....I'll bet Sarah Palin would talk to the Log Cabin Republicans if they asked her....

42 posted on 09/16/2010 10:19:53 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DirtyHarryY2K
"You want to tell the 90% of your supporters"

conservatives are NOT haters....and most conservatives could care less what goes on in people's bedrooms...infact, we insist NOT to know....and yes I know, some gays have pushed the openess stuff a bit too much....

the democrats love the way we're tearing each other apart...

we better growing up....

43 posted on 09/16/2010 10:25:54 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cherry

Those pushing the homosexual agenda are trying to destroy and remake society to suit them; their words, not mine. Now they are trying to demoralize the Republican Party, or make it arm of the militant homosexual agenda.

You say “some gays have pushed the openness stuff a bit too much”.

A BIT?? How about teaching the mechanics of anal sodomy and other sick crap in middle schools? That’s just a bit to you?


44 posted on 09/16/2010 10:31:16 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: cherry
conservatives are NOT haters....and most conservatives could care less what goes on in people's bedrooms...infact, we insist NOT to know

There are no private bedrooms in the military, I have two children in the Marine Corps.. Look, the dynamics of this issue aren't as simple as you seem to believe...

45 posted on 09/17/2010 2:14:14 AM PDT by DirtyHarryY2K (The Tree of Liberty is long overdue for its natural manure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: cherry

But Scripture says, “from such, turn away.”


46 posted on 09/17/2010 6:31:09 AM PDT by Theodore R. (Rush was right when he said America may survive Obama but not the Obama supporters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Cornyn’s mere appearance at the meeting does advance the Log Cabin goals, and he knows that of course.


47 posted on 09/17/2010 6:34:54 AM PDT by Theodore R. (Rush was right when he said America may survive Obama but not the Obama supporters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

>>Cornyn’s mere appearance at the meeting does advance the Log Cabin goals, and he knows that of course.<<

I would have no knowledge of Cornyns purpose nor would I conjecture. If this were someone like Billy Graham going to speak would we have a different view of what his goals would be perhaps?


48 posted on 09/17/2010 6:41:02 AM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: All

I disagree with the lifestyle and abhor the radical agenda of the homosexual cause.

However, I don’t have a problem with Cornyn speaking to gays if he speaks about the conservative plank of the GOP. We don’t have to accept their agenda, that is not outreach. They have to accept our agenda.

My problem with Cornyn is his support of wishy washy liberals and moderates at the NRSC.


49 posted on 09/17/2010 6:48:54 AM PDT by rbmillerjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

Am I losing it, or did I read a thread around here that Cornyn was denouncing social issues?

Geesh, I consider the gay movement a social issue. Or does Mr Cornyn only feel the need to embrace social issues approved by the clowns at RINO central?


50 posted on 09/17/2010 6:55:12 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson