Posted on 10/24/2010 11:45:04 AM PDT by max americana
ROTFL! How many "angry" gay voters are there? Funny stuff.
Maybe this is the reason Barny Frank is a nervous as a sinner in church.
Gay voters need to wake up. Obama serves the cult of Islam. Gays will be persecuted and slain in that world. Wake up, Obama is not a friend. Obama serves Satan.
The kind of angry that they would hit you over the head with their purse, you heterosexual you..
I can’t understand how anyone can be “angry” and “gay” at the same time. I guess that’s why there aren’t as many “gay” people as the “media” would like us to believe.
I disagree. Black Liberals, Latinos, and especially Gays are protected classes; they are useful voting-idiots to The Dark Lord. Anyone else will be persecuted & slain.
My first thought, as was many others here, they don’t exist in numbers big enough to sway anything.
piggybacking, barebacking, brokebacking...
Meh. Details...
So as I see it, the gays will no longer be covering Obama’s behind.
Will Obama take this laying down?
When hearing this news, will Obama choke up?
laying = lying
Gays I know will not pull a lever for a Democrat for at least two election cycles.
Lost your vote ping!
I think it’s more important that conservatives break up the homosexual vote, by pointing out some “facts of life”.
The first of these is to distinguish “what homosexuals want”, from “what liberals want”. The two are not, or should not, be identical, or it just means that homosexuals have been co-opted by the left, for the goals of the left, not the goals of homosexuals.
But conservatives can take this further. They can point out that there are some things which homosexuals want, that are not intolerable at all to conservatives.
Homosexuals do not want to be attacked or beaten solely because they are homosexuals. Importantly, this implies “state of being”, not “acts or activities.”
For example, if a homosexual states that they are a homosexual, it should be an ordinary crime to assault them. The police should be obliged to protect them if possible, or at least arrest whoever it is that assaulted them, for assault. Not unreasonable at all.
However, if a male homosexual cross dresses as a female, with the intent to defraud other males into thinking that he is a female, for the purposes of getting free drinks, gifts, or luring a drunk heterosexual male for sexual purposes, an offense has already happened. For them to be attacked for this is a *reaction* to an “act or activity” that is in effect a petty, or even serious crime.
As such, it does not *excuse* a violent assault against them, but it *does* mitigate it, as much as if they were assaulted for trying to steal a wallet. Their being a homosexual should provide them no defense for this.
So “acts or activities” need to be distinguished as to whether they are legal or not. If they are legal, then homosexuals should have all the protections of every other citizen.
Then what about “civil unions” and marriage? The purpose of marriage is procreation, and to provide an optimal situation for the raising of children. For this reason, in that well raised children are a societal prerogative, married couples are provided financial and legal incentives.
Because these incentives are oriented to couples, a reasonable argument can be made that a homosexual couple deserves at least some of these incentives as well. This, as well as incentives for the non-religious, is why “civil unions” were created. They fulfill the financial and legal equivalent, in the name of fairness.
It needs to be pointed out to homosexuals, however, that civil unions already provide them the lawful equivalent to marriage, so their efforts to be married, as such, are not for their financial or legal benefit, but are seen as just to oppress and suborn an institution that exists solely for heterosexual couples, and with religious overtones.
While such oppression may be in the leftist agenda, the homosexuals should tread very carefully, because there is a major difference between wanting advantages for yourself, and wanting to take away from others what they want.
It's all part of the same pathology.
Kate Coatar is seriously considering voting for Green Party candidates instead of Democrats, whom she normally supports. James Wyatt won't cast a ballot at all because he no longer trusts anyone to fight for causes important to him... Across the country, activists say gay voters are angry -- at the lack of progress on issues from eliminating employment discrimination to uncertainty over serving in the military to the economy... Chicago, with its large, politically and socially active gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, offers a snapshot of what some are calling the "enthusiasm gap" between voters who came out strong for Obama and other Democrats in 2008 and re-energized Republican base voters, including tea party enthusiasts who say they are primed to storm the polls. It didn't help that the controversy over the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gays erupted less than two weeks before the election, when a judge overturned it, then Obama's justice department decided to fight the judge's decision.Thanks max americana.
LOL!
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.