Gutless politicians who can be bullied by the Gaystapo and their supporters.
And therein lies the real problem: the GOP's complete rejection of conservatism.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
No testosterone.
They butted heads with the almighy Dollar. No surprise who won that battle.
Besides today's Republican leadership being squishy and wobbly, they attack the very base that they expected to have their backs on this?
-PJ
Good analysis of the rout.
Only one side fights.
One simple word: cowardice.
Gutless politicians who can be bullied by the Gaystapo and their supporters.
What’s the plan? Anyone?
When I heard that Walmart had given the word to the Arkansas governor to get his mind right, I immediately saw that as Walmart making themselves an extremely inviting target for direct action.
By which I mean a total boycott and regular picketing.
What is wrong with this idea?
I know - don-o suggested it. don-o needs to organize it. But, why would not even one of the existing organizations consider real direct action?
The children of darkness are way more committed than the children of light.
This is an excellent analysis, as always, by Brian.
His organization is worthy of our most generous support.
Two scenarios:
1. A gay couple chooses a Christian provider for their wedding, then sues him when he refuses.
2. A gay couple chooses a Christian restaurant to buy a sandwich, then sues the restaurateur when he refuses.
I think, for a number of valid historical reasons, people in general support the Christian business owner in (1), but would support the gay couple in (2). The left-wing strategy was to conflate (1) and (2).
Was there anything that distinguished catering to a public display of homosexual activity, which the gay “wedding” is, and catering to a universal human need, such as eating sandwiches? I read the bill briefly and it does not seem to make the distinction.
Under-focusing on the express wording of the first amendment, including both religious freedom and freedom to associate, is the error referred to here. When couched in terms of the whole amendment, the argument is much stronger and less prone to subversion by "feelings".
The lack of back bone in R politicians simply magnifies the outrageousness of the left's bull stuff.
” And therein lies the real problem: the GOP’s complete rejection of conservatism. ”
You totally missed their point. We conservatives shy away from activism and never take to the streets (like the other side does) to lend crucial support to (as well as hold the feet to the fire of) the people we elect.
We elect people and tell them OK go fight the war for us, we’ll have your back on free republic.
So wherein lies the real problem? We all have a mirror - all we need to do is look at it.
I might add an e to GOP, there is a difference. The GOPe has been absent in the culture war, and now we are up against the wall with moral absolutes hanging in the balance.
One point that has not been mentioned other than by Mithter Limbaugh, and that is his research indicating that much of the internet opposition ginned up by homosexual activists rests in the capable hands of ten that’s right, TEN people with computers who can generate a blizzard of fake opponent in every state in these United States.
Gutless Republicans are a very big part of pretty much every problem.
I would be fired if I spoke up at work or on FB.
“The Governors needed a public outcry from thousands of angry conservatives pointing out that “religious freedom” means having the right to decide what is immoral, unnatural, perverse, and destructive – and can be openly opposed.”
Pontius Pence folded faster than a plastic yard chair under a 500 lb man. It takes a bit longer to get an effective public outcry going than that.