[supercat]

There are some homosexuals who want to hog the limelight, have pro-gay instruction in schools, and generally be offensive. There are many more homosexuals who wish nothing more than to be left alone to interact with other, fully-consenting, adults. One major goal of the activists is to spur enough backlash toward all homosexuals that even those who just want to be left alone feel compeled to join the activists in resisting "gay bashers".

I have no problem with Republicans trying to make clear that they're no enemy of people who merely wish to be lift alone to interact with other, fully-consenting, adults. They must, however, stand firm against any recognition of "gay rights" which go beyond that and beyond those rights enjoyed by anyone else (e.g. gays have every right to be just as protected against battery as anyone else).

If Republicans can take a firm stance there, they stand to win a great many votes not only from homosexuals, but also from "homosexual sympathizers" who currently vote Democratic to protect the "victim class" of gays.

[Hoppean]

If Republicans can take a firm stance there, they stand to win a great many votes not only from homosexuals, but also from "homosexual sympathizers" who currently vote Democratic to protect the "victim class" of gays.

So the desire to win at any price means the Republicans have to become Democrats?

[narses]

I have no problem with Republicans trying to make clear that they're no enemy of people who merely wish to be lift alone to interact with other, fully-consenting, adults.

What is a "fully-consenting" adult? What can they "consent" to? What role does or should the State have in defining the family and defending it?

[narses]

Tag, you're it! I was hoping for an answer to my question.