Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gingrich: Conservatives Will Have to Accept Marriage 'Equality'
Newsmax ^ | 12/20/2012 | Stephen Feller

Posted on 12/20/2012 3:05:19 PM PST by Kazan

Edited on 12/20/2012 7:08:12 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

Newt Gingrich said that conservatives will have to accept marriage equality after three more states this year voted to allow same sex marriage and more will likely do the same in the 2014 election.

The former Speaker of the House said he didn

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: amendment; bsarticle; bsheadline; calltoaction; cassandra; facts; factsnotfiction; gingrich; homosexualagenda; hufpo; hufpost; marriage; newt; newtgingrich; phaggotalert; realismvsfantasy; rinos; statingfacts; toldyouso; warning; wrongheadline
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-323 last
To: BillyBoy

Of course Roe V. Wade was wrongly decided but it has nothing to do with the right to life because even that is regulated at the state level. With few exceptions, murder is a state matter, not a federal matter. If New Jersey were to insanely decide through its constitutional process to make murder a misdemeanor, it would be fully within its rights to do so.

Of course that would never happen and if it did you would see quite the exodus from New Jersey.

The BoR says the government can’t deprive a person of his life without due process. It DOESN’T say the government has to affirmatively protect life. That’s a significant difference.

All of which has little to do with homosexual “marriage.” States can clearly do whatever the hell they want to do in that regard. The real danger, though is that the SC - like it did in Roe V. Wade - summons up “emanations” and “pnumbras” to conjure a universal right for faggots to marry each other that states get no say over.

Hank


321 posted on 12/22/2012 10:40:41 PM PST by County Agent Hank Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: Cato in PA

Thank you, it’s can be hard to admit you were wrong.

I don’t remember fighting with you in particular but I probably did, I was hard anti-Newt.


322 posted on 12/26/2012 11:16:51 PM PST by Impy (All in favor of Harry Reid meeting Mr. Mayhem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1; BillyBoy; dforest; Cicero; stephenjohnbanker; fieldmarshaldj

Most Newts on here were inexplicably still supporting him (and bashing Santorum as a “stalking horse for Romney”) after he was no longer viable coming in 4th in most primaries. Santorum lost several key primaries thanks to Newt voters. Epic fail. Newt was done after attacking Romney from the left as an evil millionaire and getting spanked in Florida. If he hadn’t done that he may have even won. The single dumbest move of the 2012 campaign and that’s saying a lot.

Not that Santorum was great (he wasn’t, he had numerous serious flaws) but he was better than Newt and the one that was actually in second place, the only one that could have stopped Glove from getting the nomination, period. Anyone who thought otherwise failed 2nd grade math.

When I pointed this out at the time I was called a Romney plant by the Newtbots.


323 posted on 12/26/2012 11:58:19 PM PST by Impy (All in favor of Harry Reid meeting Mr. Mayhem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-323 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson