O'Reilly is a social conservative
social conservative + libertarian = conservative
Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan are 100% authentic conservatives
the rest...Romney, Huckabee etc. are pretenders
Posted on 08/14/2010 11:47:13 AM PDT by Maelstorm
Is Glenn Beck a gay marriage advocate? Beck, a convert to Mormonism, weighed in on the Proposition 8 ruling on the O'Reilly Factor Wednesday night, saying that he does not think the government "has anything to do with marriage. That is a religious rite." From the segment: O'Reilly: Do you believe that gay marriage is a threat to country in any way? Beck: A threat to the country? O'Reilly: Yeah, is it going to harm it in anyway? Beck: No I don't. Will the gays come and get us? O'Reilly: No, okay. Is it going to harm the country? Beck: I believe that Thomas Jefferson said: "If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket what difference is it to me?
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.washingtonpost.com ...
If schools were trying to change Math books that actually have solvable answers with a "creative Math" course where whatever a student feels the right answer should be is acceptable it may not break your bones but it would surely be something to be opposed.
Also Beck is wrong because the California ruling is an atrocity. It sets a precedent that is pure stupidity. It says that if the government doesn't offer licenses for a specific type of union that people desire then it should be forced to offer that license. There has never been an issue of "Marriage Equality" but we hear the intellectually dishonest phrase repeated everywhere. Anyone can get married to the opposite sex which is based on primarily natural intuitive human sexuality. Just because someone chooses to not marry a member of the opposite sex does not mean they are being discriminated against. The difference being here that homosexuals don't lose anything they just don't get anything.
This issue is one of honesty. It should not be debated solely as a matter of religion. It is a matter of commonsense something which those like Beck, Rush, and countless others who are fearful of the pink mafia hide from and it is cowardice.
Which is how I feel, and its been the case factually ever since we stopped putting people in jail for adultery and homosexuality. It is not illegal for a man to live in the same house and have sex with seven women, so is polygamy really illegal, same for homosexuals, etc. Get a state license simply adds up to paying a higher tax rate.
What heterosexuals should do if they really want to protest, is to cease apply for a state marriage license and just get married in the church. That is a refusal to acknowledge the state's right to define marriage.
If you don't think that is enough, let me ask you this: Would you be married if the state refused to give you a license, but you got married in the church without it?
If you’re not a social conservative, then you’re not a conservative.
The UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) voted this week on a US-led initiative to accredit the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC). The move effectively bypassed a subsidiary committee’s decision to defer action on the group until it answered questions about its support of new homosexual ‘rights,’ which many Member States believe directly conflict with recognized rights to freedom of religion and freedom of expression.
The Obama administration has been an active champion of IGLHRC's application to the UN since the June meeting of the committee on non-governmental organizations (NGOs) when US representatives insisted on an immediate vote on IGLHRC even though other committee members still had unanswered questions. In response to the US attempt to force a decision, Egypt called for a procedural "no action" motion.
Opposition to IGLHRC’s application centers around the group’s endorsement of a document called the Yogyakarta Principles, a document which calls for “sexual orientation and gender identity” to be new categories of nondiscrimination in UN human rights treaties. Among other things the Yogyakarta Principles calls for criminal penalties against those who criticize homosexuality.
http://www.thecypresstimes.com/article/News/National_News/US_RAMS_THROUGH_UN_APPROVAL_OF_HOMOSEXUAL_GROUP_THAT_OPPOSES_RELIGIOUS_FREEDOM/31788
Yes you would be. In most states all you need to do is live as man and wife. Meaning commingling of funds, present yourselves as married to neighbors and on utilities and credit apps.
Common Law.
Gays would have to have some sort of additional documentation. Power of Attorneys or whatever. Same effect.
Beck clearly said that everyone covers certain diverse issues. His are relating to the founding fathers. I would be bored to tears if I was forced to listen to nothing but social issues all day.
I think you and others fail to see that by arguing whether or not the govt has something to do with marriage is silly. It does have something to do with marriage. This whole homosexual marriage thing is totally a situation of backwards politics and reasoning. The argument isn’t about marriage it is about an effort to shape the culture towards sexual liberalism and take what is obvious abnormal behavior and make it mainstream.
It isn’t about listening to social issues. When the rights of the people are overridden it isn’t a social issue any more it is an issue of liberty.
One more thing. When I’ve gotten married, the priest/rabbi wanted to see the license. However when we “renewed” our vows, we had an identical service and they did not require a license to perform the service.
O'Reilly is a social conservative
social conservative + libertarian = conservative
Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan are 100% authentic conservatives
the rest...Romney, Huckabee etc. are pretenders
That pic is awesome!!!!! Love the Gipper toasting Palin!
I watched the whole segment, Beck was not supporting gay marriage. In context he was saying to O’rielly it was Bill’s job to watch the culture(warrior)issues. Beck is more concerned about the historic and constitutional aspects of what is going on with progressives turning us into a socialist utopia.
I love FR but I don’t get why some here insist on denegrating the people out there doing the most good, seems very self destructive to me. No one in the spotlight can utter all the right words all the time especially in short sound bites when you are on air 15 to 20hrs a week.
Since when does liberty mean forcing the state to license behavior that most see as abnormal? If we lose the social battle then the rest goes out the window. Sexual/Social liberalism is at the core of the appeal of liberal fiscal policy.
No, you’re just not a social conservative.
“What heterosexuals should do if they really want to protest, is to cease apply for a state marriage license and just get married in the church. That is a refusal to acknowledge the state’s right to define marriage.”
Bingo! I’m getting married shortly and this is in my mind to do.
Beck clearly said that everyone covers certain diverse issues. His are relating to the founding fathers.
The apologizing for Glenn Beck needs to stop.....if people have not figured out yet he is not a conservative....then there are some people with issues...
I didn’t say he was advocating Gay Marriage, actually I specifically said I didn’t think that was what he was advocating. I don’t expect Rush or Beck to cover social issues all the time but they have failed horribly in helping the cause. They report on social issues when the mainstream media is hyping them but they refuse to report bad behavior on part of homosexuals and activists. They don’t even report when a student is kicked out of a University program for not agreeing with the pro homosexual dogma. They aren’t doing their even their basic job on social issues and that is what pisses me off.
They aren’t even providing any fodder to their audience to help hold the line. Instead they only offer abstract support or a few seconds when they are shamed into it.
This is serious business, this is about how the culture works and letting leftist social views dominate and set the tone is an deriliction of duty.
While I respect Beck on this issue he shows a lack of common sense. If he believes that this issue is nothing to be concerned about then he has not the repsect for our rights that he claims.
I have heard some even here on FR argue that Marraige in the government/public sphere should be anything that anyone wants and that true marraige between a man and woman should just be a thing that concerns churches and religion.
That is hogwash! Why not treat all issues that way then? Murder could be accpetable under certain belief systems as is proven everyday by the “ProChioce” crowd. So maybe Beck thinks that the definition of ‘murder’ should not be addressed by the government as well.
The People have a Right to DEFINE marraige using their representation and define aspects of how the public deal with human sexuality. Beck is an idiot if he thinks that the People should just let the fascist gay left-wing force their perverted morality upon us all in public.
Beck needs to wake up. So do Hannity and Limbaugh as well. They are merely ‘Useful Idiots’ of the leftwing if they continue to not understand this issue.
We are talking about government involved in enforcing legal marriage and licensing it in effect promoting marriage...why?...
Libertarians why is it necessary for government and society's to promote marriage and not be indifferent to your cohabitation arrangement
Gay give the answerer themselves in their derogatory term for straights...Breeders
The only reason government and society's to have a justification to promote and licensing marriage is because reproduction is a fundamental requirement of any society or culture or it goes extinct....
Reproduction requirement in the reason society or culture's do not promote incestuous marriage or polygamous marriage (IE so one man does not dominate the available women for reproduction...
(Libertarians explain the justification for government interference or non promotion on the issue of incestuous marriage or polygamous marriage and how this applies to gays)
Breeders ...(IE Reproducing Couples) are a necessity for any society or culture to survive and therefor society have a justification for promoting them....
(Even to the point of declaring heterosexual couple's common law marriage...Libertarians explain the justification for government declared common law marriage and also now how it would now apply to Gay sexual cohabitation)
NonBreeders (Gay's)are not necessary society or culture survival and therefor society or culture have a right to be at best be indifferent to Gay's as they would with any other sexual cohabitation
Society and culture are not in a suicide pack... Breeders ...(IE Reproducing Couples) are a necessity and provide a service to society and culture's and society and culture's have a right to acknowledge that in some degree in it's laws
Sheesh, gays are not “coming to get us.” You can’t be “gotten” unless you want to be (and I am not talking about pedophilia and rape).
I agree with Beck, if that’s what he means. Marriages should not be the government’s business. Everyone can get their legal partnerships at the courthouse and their marriages by their clergy.
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.