Posted on 08/20/2010 2:55:46 PM PDT by RonDog
These people disagree.
Ann Coulter Applauded by Young Conservatives for 'HomoCon' Speech
"Conservatism and gay rights are actually natural allies," said S.E. Cupp, conservative columnist and author of "Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media's Attack on Christianity." "Conservatism rightly seeks to keep the government out of our private lives, and when you strip away the politics of pop culture, it's this assertion of privacy and freedom that the gay rights movement is essentially making."This is how institutions evolve and emerge within a conservative culture," says Jon Henke, a libertarian-leaning blogger. "In time, gay people will be married, extending the valuable social institution of marriage to more people. In time, conservatives will argue that the positive impact that marriage has on the gay community is further evidence of the importance of the institution of marriage."
Change has come gradually, and it's worth noting that Coulter's decision to speak at HomoCon is merely the latest example of prominent conservatives (of all ages) lending, at least, tacit support to the cause of gay rights.
Poor Ann. She has a lot of that emotional angry spirit in her which is what makes gay people gay.
bttt bookmark!
Ann Coulter will NOT explain why because she can't credibly do so.
The birther issue ia really very simple.
If Coulter can't defend the Constitution ( **ALL** of it) when it safe to do so, there is NO POSSIBLE WAY she will defend it in the face of real tyranny!! That's a fact! That's her true character.
When jack boots march in the street, Ann will sell her talents to the fascist oligarchy. She will spit shine the jack boots crushing our necks.
Does speaking at a conference mean you support their agenda? Did you see Ann’s comments on speaking at college campuses? Does that mean she supports everything coming out of left-wing academia? Clearly not.
Simply preaching to the choir is a very ineffective means of getting out the Conservative message. Ann goes anywhere and everywhere to speak, which she should be applauded for.
Have you read their legislative agenda?
I posted it on the first page of this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2574603/posts?q=1&;page=72
Everything except gun rights is Big Government “gay” agenda.
If she doesn’t point out that their agenda is unconstitutional, then she has let everyone know where she stands.
Still, he was the best Governor Massachusetts has seen in a very long while.
To me it makes evident that he is not a real politician, and perhaps not a real conservative, but I'd take him for Governor and even President over who we have now and over who the choices were in 2008.
I do not get this slamming of Ann Coulter at all.
There were a lot of better choices than Romney, Giuliani or McCain. My honest opinion is that voters were setup. And we were along for the ride, willing or not.
And that is scary.
Excellent point Fabian, I never even thought of it that way, she probably doesn’t either.
What an inane post. Just proved to me why you support whoring for homos. Maybe you got jellybeans for brains I don’t know. Why not take your homo sympathies to DU where they are lauded. Not here, not EVER.
And that’s always the problem isn’t it? United we stand, divided we fall, and right now we are in a freefall.
Nope.....Just a gutless coward.
I’m disappointed that a Constitutional Lawyer, a woman who has dedicated herself to the study of our laws and Conservative principles would not have concerns over an admitted dual-citizen being President. As a student of history, Ann would know our founders were very concerned about foreign influence in the White House. If she knows of some obscure Supreme Court ruling that has affirmed an admitted dual-national is eligible as a Natural Born Citizen, I’d love for her to tell us about it. On the same note, if she believes a dual-citizen is eligible under our Constitution, I wish she would explain why. Coming from Coulter, many people would be willing to listen and accept her reasoning.Ann?I’d also ask her if she is comfortable with a man who has sealed every bit of his background papers, including his original birth certificate when no other President has gone to the lengths Obama has to seal his background. If she is comfortable with a President who does this I’d like to know her reasoning for finding it acceptable and why she would believe the public does not have the right to review a persons background who sits at the head of our government. If she is not comfortable, I’d like to know why she has not spoken out, on at least that issue.
We're waiting...
Okay.
How about in 21 words, and in verse?
Obama hasn't proven
He's what the Constitution says he must be
The burden of proof is on him
Not on me
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.