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

To: AHerald

Thanks for posting the Repub. platform information. I hadn't remembered the platform as opposing civil unions. Just another attempt by the Old Grey Lady to keep Christians away from the polls for the President this year.


92 posted on 10/26/2004 5:54:41 AM PDT by SuziQ (Bush in 2004-Because we MUST!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]


To: SuziQ
Just another attempt by the Old Grey Lady to keep Christians away from the polls for the President this year.

Precisely.

It looks like Bush got snookered. Still, it would have been much better had Bush not accepted Gibson's question at face value and responded with the actual party platform position.

106 posted on 10/26/2004 6:02:23 AM PDT by AHerald ("I'm George W. Bush, and I approved this butt-whoopin'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies ]

To: SuziQ; ruralgal; RightMike
I hadn't remembered the platform as opposing civil unions.

Upon rereading, looks like I was wrong and judged too quickly. I neglected this last line, which can obviously be interpreted as opposition to "civil unions":

We believe that legal recognition and the accompanying benefits afforded couples should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman which has historically been called marriage.

So, it looks like Gibson's question was fair. And Bush wasn't snookered.

Nonetheless, Bush gave the right answer as far as I'm concerned. Leave the matter to the states.

125 posted on 10/26/2004 6:12:21 AM PDT by AHerald ("I'm George W. Bush, and I approved this butt-whoopin'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies ]

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