Skip to comments.Brad Pitt Supports Obama, Says Gay Marriage Is Inevitable
Posted on 09/10/2012 8:55:44 AM PDT by scottjewell
During a press conference for his latest film, Killing Them Softly, Pitt said:
I am an Obama supporter and Im backing his election campaign
Gay marriage is inevitable. The next generation, they get it. It is just a matter of time before it becomes a reality.
(Excerpt) Read more at inquisitr.com ...
I guess when you’re uber rich the economy is not an issue.
Yep, it’s not about gay marriage...it’s about the destruction of Christianity.
If they get legal recognition by the Fed Gov - does anybody think that “it’s all resolved now”? Of course not, they’ll only be content when *every* organization, religious or not, recognize (forced to accept) their status as “equal”. Of course, Christianity won’t, therefore it must be destroyed.
This doesn’t, of course, apply to Muslims - because they’re also just “victims” of horrible Christian prejudice!!! ;) The activists only target Christianity because they know Christians won’t kill them...although they’re not really thinking ahead. The only thing standing between them and Muslims are Christians.
When you step back to the Big Picture,
Muslims and Gays and Communists and Fascists and Big Gov’t supporters, etc
are all on the same side - opposing the Son of God and His people.
Something everyone should keep in their “holster” is this -
when a leftist tries to corner you with “do you think homosexuality is a sin”, answer “go ask a Muslim”.
Evidence we need a spiritual revival in America. Let us pray.
One of Brad Pitt’s homes...think he is willing to allow the 99% to come and relax here?
How about polygamy and adult incestual marriage? Just as inevitable?
Actually, it is better than that Liberty...Brad the millionaire likely votes in California....where the outcome is known.
His mom lives in Missouri, a battleground state. So her vote is worth more. :)
GOP Governors have been revoking states' funding for Planned Parenthood.
This is the thing that cranked up the recent "War on Women" mantra from the Dems (and the mandate for insurance companies since state money is not dependable for them anymore).
Behind the scenes they are losing their grip on abortion.
They have never yet had a referendum where the people voted in favor of gay marriage. Even California voted against it.
That's why they're trying so hard in WA and MD this November. They need at least one success in a referendum so they can say, "See? The people are in favor of it."
(I'm giving money to the Washington State effort to stop them. I don't live there but I don't want them to get even one referendum in their column.)
Pitt is in favor of gay marriage and has spoken out for it on more than one occasion.
He and Jolie have even said that they won't marry until it is the law of the land.
Logically, yes - they are inevitable as well.
Thanks for that-— actually sickening when you think about it. Of course he can be concerned with frivolous things like “gay marriage”. Yes, we need to pray and to revive.
Right. Rich and spoiled and concerned with frivolous things like “gay marriage”.
So what I’m seeing here is that Brad Pitt felt the need to throw his mother under the bus.
We all know Brad’s view on homosexual marriage. Is he a politician running for office? Did he really need to say anything except:
“My mother is entitled to her opinion which differs from mine.”
Now it’s like he had to step all over his mother and overshadow her. Makes him look like the jerk he is.
Apparently Pitt isn’t concerned that the economy might be an issue for “gays” either. Maybe he will take them all in and house and feed them. Assuming any of his wealth is worth the paper its printed on.
Yes, he has revealed himself to be a jerk for certain.
I’ve been hearing for years that Pitt is a switch-hitter. This little homo-loving creep is a disgrace to humanity.
With the gay casting couch in Hollywood, it’s pretty safe to assume these days that any actor plays for the other team.
Just make “Gay Divorce” damned near impossible without both side losing their shirts... Financially speaking that is...
I had not thought of that. That pepped me up a bit. Thanks ;o)
okay, so shouldn't theis be our standard reply:
"Okay so you are in favor of an additional 1.5% increase in your social security deduction to cover the spouse retirement and disability?"
Arizona 2006, amendment failed by 1% or so. Two years later it was succesfully passed. Cali passed prop 8 by 52% in 2008.
It wasnt even an issue 30 years ago anywhere, for liberal or conservative states. Hawaii is fairly liberal. It passed its amendment by 69% in 98. North Carolina is fairly conservative. It passed its amendment by 61% in 2012 and was hailed as some sort of great victory. Look at when the states around NC passed their amendments and what they passed by, you find that they passed them in 2004 or 2006. With the one exeption of Va, not one passed theirs lower than the mid 70% ranges.
This is like the “settled science” man-made global warming band wagon.
It’s a big lie that Americans want radicals and perverts redefining marriage and family.
It's the legislatures and judiciaries that have been passing these things (NY was up in arms a few months ago because the legislature passed it contrary to the referendum).
The referendums (straight people's vote) has never yet passed one.
Gov. Linda Lingle (HI) and Gov. Chris Christie (NJ) both vetoed their amendments because the people had decided they didn't want it.
And the reason it is today is that an activist sliver of a minority (2%) is EXTREMELY politically active and trying to outsmart the populace.
This is NOT a grassroots issue. The people generally either are apathetic about it or don't want it.
“The referendums (straight people’s vote) has never yet passed one.”
It failed to pass in Arizona the first time. And your point is a good one, it is much easier for homosexualists to use judge-fiat. But my point is they won’t need judges if the majority accepts ‘gay marriage,’ and the trend isn’t as positive as most seem to think by the popular vote.
You're talking about in the legislature, right?
The average the amendments passed by was 67% or so. Many passed by much more, some passed by much slimmer margins. In my opinion, if you would have told someone 30 years ago that only 67% of the voting public would think ‘gay marriage’ was impossible, they would have thought you were wacked.
Is that a value judgement?
Well Brad, I hear Alec Baldwin is looking for a partner and if that doesn’t work out Barney Frank is not averse to homopolygamy.
No, I am talking about prop. 107, a ‘gay marriage’ referendum that was failed to pass by a slim margin. It then passed two years later by a larger margin than it failed by the first time, which was great.
“You shouldn’t speak until you know what you’re talking about. That’s why I get uncomfortable with interviews. Reporters ask me what I feel China should do about Tibet. Who cares what I think China should do? I’m a f’ng actor! They hand me a script. I act. I’m here for entertainment. Basically, when you whittle everything away, I’m a grown man who puts on makeup.” ` Brad Pitt, 1997
Right. What kind of judgement is it, on closer examination? If gay marriage is wrong - as I and all of us here presume, with good reason, it to be, then Pitt is saying something inherently wrong is inevitable. It’s like saying liver disease is inevitable in the alcoholic. Inevitable does NOT = right or good.
Great quote, too bad he forgot his former logic. (”Oh but I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now” (to quote an old song).
I have always been annoyed when Cher or Madonna or Martin Sheen or any actor presumes to wax forth on some war or political ideology. They should shut up and entertain. Acting/singing does not make one a political expert.
Actually, I was too young to “understand” the mentality of hippies in their prime time - the seventies and early eighties. But in my awake lifetime, it’s aways been almost half ‘n half for civilization and against civilization.
Conservatives, when they rose up with Reagan and engaged the amorals (liberals/hippies), made headway to save a lot of “if it feels good do it” mindless idiots. They argued scientifically - based on social data of outcomes amongst the major dark and light choices in life - that liberals tried to hide and named politically incorrect. For my part of this generation, we had a clear understanding of choices and their statistical consequences.
Thanks to conservatives, it was not just Christian faith. It was faith measured by science. And God is not stupid. If He told us to avoid certain patterns, ideology and behaviors, do it. It’s transferable to science data in outcomes. EVERY time.