Posted on 06/15/2011 10:07:05 AM PDT by EricTheRed_VocalMinority
IB4TZ?
It might turn off independents, or it might not matter.
Still, he could easily “fix” any potential problem with an addendum stating:
“While I personally believe homosexuality is a sin and a choice, please understand that the only litmus test I will apply to anyone is to be loyal to the United States of America, and my views on the issue have zero involvement in any policy I will support or bill I will sign.”
“IB4TZ?”
Why?
Sorry! I post without reading the other comments sometimes.
Like now.
Why? To me it’s an unimportant issue and shouldn’t affect any position on an issue, even a social one.
Well, you’ve been here a couple of years longer than I have. I would think you’d know “which way the wind is blowing.”
It is a sin and a choice. What else would it be? How would you describe it?
Then someone isn't a 'staunch conservative'. And it ain't Cain.
That statement should bite 'him' in the butt. This bow to the 'gay' agenda/PC-police is decidedly not "staunch" conservatism.
NOTICE: FR DOES NOT AND WILL NOT SUPPORT ABORTIONIST, GAY RIGHTS PUSHING BIG GOVERNMENT STATISTS
> Cain said that homosexuality is a “sin” and a “choice”.
> Even as a staunch conservative, I don’t agree with either > description and can’t condone those statements.
Then, by definition, you’re not a staunch conservative. If your conservatism does not include moral issues, such as abortion and perversion, then you are probably a libertarian, not a conservative.
Just as an aside, are polyamory, pedophilia, necrophilia, and bestiality sins? Have the practicioners of these things made a choice?
> And that’s going to bite him in the butt politically
> because it’s going to repel the independents (that’s my
> unprofessional opinion).
So be it.
The Truth is the Truth, like it or not, and it’s refreshing to hear someone speaking the Truth for a change.
Great points. Interesting “staunch conservative” (NOT) content on an EricTheRed (seriously?!) blog ping.
The writer is about as staunch a conservative as Eric Holder. The writer has no idea what conservatives think - I suspect he is a plant - “pretend to be a staunch conservative and spew the progressive line.” It’s an old ploy and no one is falling for it.
my post was somewhat tongue in cheek, but Jim had posted a most fervent reason why he would zot anyone towing the gay is ok line. Other posters pointed out the same thing in this thread (that the OP’s statement that he can’t condone Cain’s stance on homosexuality being a choice and a sin is really odd coming from a self proclaimed staunch conservative).
Those would be the main reasons why.
Here’s the link to Jim’s Post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2725798/posts
I do not think that anything in this article can be defined as “Pro-gay.” He DID disagree with one opinion, but did not substitute a pro-gay one in it’s stead.
Unpopular truths are freely spoken here in JimRob’s world.
Pseudo-scientific psychobabble, not so much.
That’s why I like it here.
You don't think it's a sin?
You don't think it's a choice?
Butsecks between men just happens by accident?
You're the guy who stands up on the bus, en route to the AIDS clinic, huh?
Hurts to sit, does it?
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.