Skip to comments.Laura Bush Supports Gay Marriage, Abortion
Posted on 05/12/2010 6:47:05 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Former first lady Laura Bush has broken with her husband on the premier social issues of his administration and said she backs gay marriage and abortion.
After more than eight years of silence on the controversial issues, Mrs. Bush said in an interview with CNN's Larry KingTuesday, that gay marriage and abortion were points of contention with her husband, former President George W. Bush.
Mrs. Bush in recent weeks has been promoting her memoir "Spoken from the Heart," in which she writes about her life both before and after becoming first lady.
In response to a question about gay marriage, she said, "There are a lot of people who have trouble coming to terms with that because they see marriage as traditionally between a man and a woman. But I also know that, you know, when couples are committed to each other and love each other, that they ought to have, I think, the same sort of rights that everyone has."
Mrs. Bush said she and the ex-president "disagree" on legalizing same-sex marriage.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Yeah, I did see one of those. It was great.
Why couldn’t Bush or McCain just study those tapes and copy Scalia?
‘Judges shouldn’t legislate from the bench’ is true and most people agree, but our guys need to go a littel further than that.
LOL!! That’s what I started - packing up clothes to donate.
Have a great FRfree weekend.;)
Let’s review what we learned today in Crazy Town. I;m not really sure, but I think it goes like this:
- “Butchering babies” is a bad thing, but abortion is not, especially if Laura Bush is for it.
- Deb becomes progressively unhinged if you argue with her long enough (took me about 3 posts, but you guys already had her riled up).
And sometimes you can just tell really early. There were a couple of kids in my high school that I just knew were gay. I could tell from mannerisms -- things like voice tone and mannerisms are substantially genetic. I thought to myself, these guys are gay. And it wasn't anything environmental that did it to them. They probably knew from a very young age that they were gay, just like I knew from a young age that I was straight. I knew I liked looking at the lingerie-clad models in the JC Penney catalog, haha.
Now that doesn't mean that people need to support gay marriage simply because it's most likely an inherited trait, like eye color or handedness. Quite the contrary. But I am completely unconvinced that it is a choice. I don't see the benefits that homosexuals are getting by choosing it. What benefits does society confer on them? Why would someone choose to be gay today?
Nope. I haven't seen any evidence to make me believe that someone chooses to be gay. People can debate the ramifications of homosexuality all day, but I think that people are largely born gay.
BUT, for a growing segment I do think it is a choice or more a pathology. Especially as society becomes more ill.
People choose all sorts of self destructive behavior for complicated reasons.
Didn’t really understand your response.
I'm just so very disappointed in Laura Bush over this.
She has the typical liberal habit of not thinking, but rather, she responds from her emotions. You can tell from her reasons for homosexual “marriage.”
I think it's something else -- it's like an oil slick that spreads out and fouls everything. Sometimes I think, "Are all these people being blackmailed?" Because they seem to come to decisions about fundamental issues that are so against the principles that they and the country grew up with and were intellectually and morally nurtured by.
It has got to be a sociopolitical conspiracy of some kind, disciplining people in DC and the Atlantic corridor who deviate from The Agenda, so that all the elites up and down the Megalopolis fall into line.
If that's the case .... (censoring self).
Irving Bieber, before the homosexuals mugged the American Psychiatric Association and took over all the committees on the subject and began enforcing PC, did a longitudinal study of homosexual men in the late 1950's and early 1960's.
He looked at whether psychotherapy could help men who displayed homosexual behavior, which in turn involved some inquiry into the etiology of homosexuality.
Long book cut short, he concluded that about 1/3rd of homosexual men are "hard-wired" (i.e. "essential" homosexuals), while other groups display varying responses to attempts at psychotherapy and conversion therapy. He was attacked by the gay cabal, who tried to discredit him and terminate studies like his.
Nevertheless, in the 1990's, some 35-40% of healthcare professionals still believed, like Bieber and against the best propaganda efforts of the cabal, that homosexuality is primarily psychological (and therefore susceptible of psychotherapeutic amelioration).
The "essentialist" position is basically a lawyer's position, and not science; it's an argument the gay lawyer corps wants to push on the Supreme Court, that homosexuality is an "is", i.e. an essence (like black skin), and not a behavior or choice (and therefore subject to society's legislation and undeserving of the Supreme Court's highest standards of legal protection).
Interestingly, there are a significant proportion of gays who believe that sexual identity is "constructed", plastic, fluid, and changeable. Which means they are not on the same page as Lambda Legal, which will have somehow to keep them out of the courtroom.
How can you "admire" anyone who supports the murder of innocent human life?
The disgusting idolatry that was practiced toward Laura Bush for YEARS here on FR was frankly: sinful.
There. I said it, and I’ll stand by it.
;^). . .this forum is awesome!
You are aware that something called "the Fall of Man" happened a few years back, no? Free Will was reputedly involved? It was reported to have had some deleterious effects on God's creation?
I don't believe that there will be drunks in Heaven; but that doesn't mean that there aren't a few otherwise-upstanding Christians out there who struggle with an innate weakness for the Demon Bottle, here and now, in this life. Other folks have other weaknesses.
The question is not whether or not we are each born with temptations towards one (or more) sin or another; I think that's almost a Theological certainty. The question, rather, is whether or not we choose to act on our innate temptations.
We enter the world literally as innocent as babes.
What happens to us, specifically the choices that we make between the womb and the tomb remains a matter of free will.
Your observations on temptations and our personal struggles with them are poignant.
I don’t claim to know all the answers, but I do know what I believe, and all I can do is “each day, try my best, and trust Jesus for the rest.”
“I cannot concur with that, based on the fact that God does not manufacture defective goods. For Him to design someone to be homosexual would be contrary to His Word, and that Word is something which He will not break.”
Yes, and one might also mention the fact that there is no scientific or even anecdotal evidence to support the notion that people are “born” with a compulsion to commit sodomy.
“You may of course subscribe to whatever explanation that you might be comfortable with which is another benefit of Godly construction, a free mind to believe whatever you wish.”
Also true, but I would note that there is a difference between having the ability to be wrong and having the right to be wrong.
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.