It is indeed your right not to care, cricket.
But whether you like it...or not...they are indeed issues, and important ones.
Most conservatives could care less whether people are heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or any other kind of sexual in the privacy of their homes.
They DO have concerns, and valid ones at that, whether we as a society should bestow the imprimatur of normalcy on homosexuality.
People who do care would regard YOUR statement in your post as 'moralizing'.
No question; and an issue that can be communicated by one's stand on the very questions/issues that I suggested in my response.
There is a difference in how one shares one's philosophy/beliefs. . .in political tones or simply by making moralistic pronouncements. For those who are engaging in the politics of the day; and want to lead a nation; I would prefer to hear their 'politics'. Their personal beliefs; their moral commitment if 'personally embedded', are easily recognized in their political philosophy.
I do not think in six years of the Presidency; that I have ever heard GW make a personal, moral pronouncement; in the negative i.e. against the behavior choices of another person. President Bush, has OTHO, made most clear, his moral commitment by his political pronouncements and choices and there is no doubt as to his core values that have been shaped by his Faith which give rise to his political vision.
There is a difference here; the President is not leading a Congregation; he is leading a nation. . .President Bush, realizes the difference; and Brownback needs to learn it. IMHO. . .