Posted on 09/19/2012 10:50:47 AM PDT by Uncle Slayton
The Clint Eastwood on gay marriage episode of Ellen DeGeneres' talk-show showed "Dirty Harry" again in the "raw." The actor-director shared his views on same-sex-marriage and his role with the Libertarian Party. In the wake of the RNC, viewers got an even closer glimpse at the Hollywood legend.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
So? He is wrong just like Ellen.
Just because someone is right about needing to fire Obamugabe doesn’t make them right on social issues.
Exactly. This shouldn't surprise anyone, though.
Marriage is public, not private.
Before I decide whether or not to vote against him, remind me again what he is running for?
According to the article Clint said he just doesn’t care. Is it quite certain this Ellen person feels the same?
Yawn. How is this surprising? Eastwood was right about Obama being a lousy president. He’s dead wrong about sodomite “marriage” being the equivalent of actual marriage.
Good answer. I couldn’t care less and am sick of hearing about it.
Yeah, I’m wearing my flameproof dungarees, but I won’t respond to the flamers anyway. It’s just not worth it.
I've also conversed with Clint Eastwood so I'm prejudiced. He’a a good guy in my opinion, and I'm sure we agree on a lot of things, including the America dream of freedom through free enterprise.
I would have to agree...
I really don’t care about gay marriage, isn’t an issue for me, government shouldn’t even have a hand in this at all, marriage isn’t a government entitlement.
If gays get married it doesn’t infringe on your rights, it places no burden on you other than the burden of non-interference (meaning you only have to ignore it).
Most here may disagree with gay marriage, and you’re free to do that as others are free to agree with it, but your disagreement is based on religious views, and religion is something that, for most, is a personal matter.
You can not sit and complain when Muslims want to push Sharia law on us, yet happily cheer when Catholics/Christians want to push their beliefs on all, I find it hypocritical in a monumental fashion.
Using the force of government to make others act as you want them to makes you no better than a liberal, you can not fight against government intervention and encroachment, then turn around and cheer that same intervention and encroachment because you agree with it.
Sorry, freedom isn’t something you can give and take based on a political whim, if you truly believe in freedom then you believe all people should be able to perform any peaceful act as long as that act does not infringe on the rights of another or place a burden on another member of society.
You are free to do as you choose.
You can’t call yourself freedom loving if you believe in limiting the freedoms of others because you disagree with those actions.
Well, if Eastwood were actually running for some office, his degenerate views on homo-marriage would mean more to me. It would indeed cause me to withhold a vote for him. But since he’s not running, it’s a rather mood point.
That is the libertarian mindset. Anything goes. Ron Paul voted for legalizing sodomy in the Armed Forces. Eastwood would have done the same thing. All libertarians act like idiots. “Leave me alone, I don’t care, stay out of my life, if I want to marry my brother or sister, or dog or cat, it’s my own business, just leave me alone”. BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
I’m not interested in being forced to “celebrate” sodomy; and I don’t intend to do so. I’m not stopping them from doing what they want. - Decided if they wanted to be filthy, let them be filthy still (unbothered). - I do have a problem paying fines and taxes in order to pay for some “transgendered” person’s surgeries, hormone treatments and psychiatric “therapy” to the tune of thousands of dollars. This is stupid. I have to be what I is and make peace with it; less complicated that way and okay by me. The rest of it for the most part, I can ignore. If Fred kisses George, I’ll turn my head and ignore their bad manners. Public displays of affection are tiresome anyway.
There has been a whole lot of “gay chatter” on FR lately. The whole deal about going into a dead guy’s “Ambassador Stevens” background and discussing his gayness and now this.
This whole thing is kinda gay.
less than 1% is gay
Bravo!
I agree with regards to having a problem paying for sex changes and treatments, again that falls into the “no burden on society” portion of my statement.
Interesting take on things. I didn't think that it was acceptable to promote homosexual marriage here, but I can't find a link to that opinion.
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.