Posted on 07/16/2005 12:12:46 PM PDT by gopgen
Two plus two equals five.
That's a mistake.
Running commercials for pro abortion, gun grabbing, tax and spend big government liberal Arlen Specter was a conscious decision.
Doing campaign appearances for Arlen was a deliberate course of action.
What do you think of Santorum's support for raising SS tax? Raising the minimum wage? Redistributing wealth by giving newborns a $500 gift at birth? Voting against adding border agents to protect the border? Lining up for photo ops with Schumer, Kennedy, and Clinton?
What do you think of his votes in the last Congress that took him from being the 2nd or 3rd most conservative Senator to being LEFT OF CENTER?
Santorum either lost his way because of Potomac Fever or he never was the conservative that he claimed to be. He is puritanical, to be sure, but I don't believe that he has any credibility left in claiming to be conservative.
There is always hope through prayer. But, engaging the argument with a closed mind IS pretty much wasted effort.
Okay, I'll try this again.
He isn't running a church or other religious organization.
RICK SANTORUM IS NOT A HYPOCRITE BECAUSE HE CONDEMNS SIN YET EMPLOYS A SINNER. All people sin, and most people sin habitually. A non-repentant homosexual is no worse than any other non-repentant sinner. Unless you are willing to say that he can't employ ANY sinners, then how can you make an exception for THIS sin?
One of the things I'm proudest of on FR.
And I still say you're a bigot and can't stand it because the rest of us aren't like you.
So never, right?
"I am curious about you? Answer honestly. Are you a moderate Republican that wishes all us Bible believing conservative Christians would go away?"
No. And no one who knows me would consider me "moderate." And I can't begin to tell you how much I resent "Bible believing conservative Christians" like you who think they own the issues and know the Way. They don't. Jesus does. Please don't hijack Him in His Name.
By the way, I am a Bible believing conservative Christian myself, and most of the Bible believing conservative Christians I know are NOT like you.
So if it's okay to bash gays, we'll have a lot more "true" conservatives?
Your question contains an accusation, masquerading as merely a false premise. It is a perfect illustration of my point--any opposition to any element of the homosexual agenda, or criticism of any homosexual on ANY grounds, is immediately labeled as something unsavory.
In other words, you just illustrated my point perfectly.
Thanks for playing!
Full Disclosure: Given the topic under consideration, perhaps I should have written fabulously instead of perfectly.
Cheers!
Back to badmouth Santorum, I see. Is it your hobby?
While I don't support Santorum due to his treachery in last election's primary campaign toward a conservative who was running against Arlen Specter, I don't have any irrefutable argument to put forward that he's not a solid conservative. But, I think it isn't a sure bet that he is. It strikes me that his conservatism is soft and subject to the winds that blow this way and that.
It is entirely likely that he did not know his top aide was a homosexual. Finding that fact out should not be a cause for firing the aide.
However, given that matching one's message is important, there are questions that one would expect to arise if Santorum was entirely cognizant of his top aide's homosexual behavior prior to his being brought on in that capacity. (1) Is it a contradiction to hire someone who is the opposite of your message? (For example, if Ron Paul hired Ralph Nader as his spokesperson, would that raise questions? More to the point: If President Bush appoints Alberto Gonzales to the SCOTUS, does that call into question the Pres's often announced committment to "strict" constructionist judges?) (2) If one finds a disconnect, then does it say that one is dealing with a different definition of conservatism, a different variety of political philosophy albeit similar to conservatism, or perhaps something that is not conservatism at all?
Homosexuality is incompatible with conservatism. That is simple logic based on the definitions of words.
Well, we will differ here; I agree with most of Dane's posts, but we differ here.
I'm not denying there is a homosexual agenda; I'm just saying that in this case, I do see the hypocrisy some of them are claiming.
Is raging lunacy supposed to convince me of anything?
If the homosexual population is less than 3%, how do you figure that every family has someone that is homosexual?
Now you do sound like a gay rights activist promoting the idea that there are more gays than there really are. Why?
Bump to that post.
Here's a hint
Tone it down now
Aye, but those were through human intermediaries, not angels. And in those cases as well, the destruction was for the evil behaviour of those populations.
So by your logic, homosexuality is just one of the big No-No's--it is still not rendered acceptable.
Thanks for playing!
"I do not condone the homosexual lifestyle, nor do I wish it forced upon myself or my children and grandchildren. However, what that poster states reeks of mayhem in the making. I do not know of Senator Santorum's voting record in toto, but it would appear that he is a most decent and honourable individual. Sadly, loyalty is lost upon some."
With those words, you could speak for me. You have. As for your closing, about loyalty...has it not occurred to anyone else that Santorum, while publicly disapproving of this lifestyle, yet standing tall in defense of a man he calls his friend, is committing a very high act of moral courage?
No, but from the sounds of it, the outed employee does ;-)
Cheers!
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.