Posted on 05/12/2012 7:44:19 AM PDT by markomalley
A memo sent out by a Republican pollster has been making the rounds online for its conclusion that the party needs to embrace gay marriage as part of its platform because of recent trends showing increased support for this important social issue. Jan van Lohuizen, who worked as a pollster for George W. Bush in 2004, made the case that the GOP should be fighting for gay marriage as a conservative issue, by emphasizing that “freedom means freedom for everyone.”
The memo contains polling data showing that not only is support of gay marriage steadily increasing with the American people at large, but that a majority of Republicans now support “extending basic legal protections to gays and lesbians” like the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and hospital visitation rights for gay and lesbian partners. Van Lohuizen stresses that this position does not mean gays and lesbians would be given special treatment, but instead ensures they are given the same protections under the law as everyone else.
“People who believe in equality under the law as a fundamental principle, as I do, will agree that this principle extends to gay and lesbian couples; gay and lesbian couples should not face discrimination and their relationship should be protected under the law. People who disagree on the fundamental nature of marriage can agree, at the same time, that gays and lesbians should receive essential rights and protections such as hospital visitation, adoption rights, and health and death benefits.”
He also explains how the GOP can frame support of gay marriage as a conservative issue.
“As people who promote personal responsibility, family values, commitment and stability, and emphasize freedom and limited government we have to recognize that freedom means freedom for everyone. This includes the freedom to decide how you live and to enter into relationships of your choosing, the freedom to live without excessive interference of the regulatory force of government.”
Heck yes. Then we can become the nation that Carroll Quigley (sp) Bubbas mentor at Georgetown, wrote that the 2 parties should come together so as any election there will be no disparity. Of course it must come together as this dem/commie group. See how wonderful things could be - birds chirping, children dancing around the trees,etc.
Wrong, I was only saying what will happen if the sick bastards get anything changed from the current standard.
It is only a way to explain to the idiots that nothing but one Man, one Woman marriage can ever be acceptable, no queer unions, no queer partnerships.
We all now how much we can believe anything in the Washington Post.
LOL
no queer unions, no queer partnerships.
I would like to get the government out of the income tax business too.
shows what low iq he has. that obama not only thinks abortion is ok, but that if baby survives the attempt to kill it, it’s ok to toss it in a closet and let it starve to death or whatever should have proved to him that obama never really believed in God.
” I’ve never even seen a homosexual who was “gay”. They are all always pissed off about something.”
Exactly. Gay means happy, queer means odd. If they don’t like being called queer they can call themselves ‘Odds’.
If the G.O.P. bscks homosexual “marriage”, I am out of the
Republican Party.
If you thought anything different, you have never read my posts on the subject or my ‘about’ page.
Frankly, sugar, none of YOUR arguments hold water, with us, or with the electorate. Gay sex is equivalent to animal sex; it's anal, that's all it is; yes, sex IS about producing babies, and NO, we are not Paul supporters..
5. Everyone says that Mitt Romney is the front-runner, but no one (in their heart of hearts) thinks he “fits” as a GOP presidential nominee. What's your take on Romney? Can he win? What are his strengths and weaknesses as we head into the primary season?
(Up front is the really interesting bits of grain. Willard is essential a ‘pitchman’ he doesn't believe in anything just in making the sale. So we have the equivalent of a high level form of time share salesman about to clinch the GOP nomination.)
JVL: I worked for the Romney campaign 4 years ago and it was one of the worst if not the worst campaign experiences I’ve had. I personally liked (and like) Romney, and he’s clearly very bright, but I came to the conclusion that to be a successful venture capitalist you mostly have to be a great pitchman, much more so than a great manager.
Romney clearly is a good pitchman, and I think that in ’08 this was more a liability than an asset: he sounded as convincing telling people he was pro-choice (on tape in his campaign for Senate against Kennedy) as he sounded telling people he was pro-life 4 years ago. That made a lot of people very nervous. It might have been survivable if he switched on just one issue, but he switched on so many that he lost his credibility. I think the damage has proven to be lasting.
In his current campaign he made the right decision to try to become the leading economic expert in the field. However, if you read what he actually says it sound very hollow and mostly consists of safe conservative dogma; if he has said something original on the economy I missed it. I do think he will be a strong candidate against the President if he manages to get out of the primaries, but whether he does remains to be seen.
No, we should not celebrate two people who are taking themselves out of he gene pool while publically embracing a lifestyle that will take 25 years off their life span.
No, we should not celebrate two people who are taking themselves out of he gene pool while publically embracing a lifestyle that will take 25 years off their life span.
No, we should not celebrate two people who are taking themselves out of he gene pool while publically embracing a lifestyle that will take 25 years off their life span.
Never heard of him.
Is he at the "Lovenstein Institute"?
“People who believe in equality under the law as a fundamental principle, as I do, will agree that this principle extends to gay and lesbian couples; gay and lesbian couples should not face discrimination and their relationship should be protected under the law. People who disagree on the fundamental nature of marriage can agree, at the same time, that gays and lesbians should receive essential rights and protections such as hospital visitation, adoption rights, and health and death benefits.”
Ummmm ... you know that doesn't mean he supports gay marriage, don't you?
If you thought anything different, you have never read my posts on the subject or my ‘about’ page.
“In other words, ‘Jan van Lohuizen’ is gay and he wants conservatives to go against their morals and values to appease his lifestyle choice.”
Exactly.
Whoa there! You make too much sense. The GOPe will thus ignore it.
A foreshadowing of Mitt Romney’s Republican Party. Had enough yet?
They say they support equality under the law, but invariably they don’t extend such concern to unborn people.
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.