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

To: MNJohnnie; All

I agree with your sentiments, and historically, so did Goldwater, Reagan and Gingrich in the past.

And, instead of leaving the GOP to the RINOS it is up to Conservatives to go back to our political study books and our political principles, fight even harder than we have for a decade at the grass roots (House of Representatives) and continue to build the constituencies and the candidates for continued Conservative rewnewal IN THE GOP.

However, that does not mean that Conservatives cannot also, and do not also need, to consider priorities and looking at just what are the essentials. Sometimes, if "social" and "libertarian" Conservatives would look beyond a particular result they want to the underlying governance problem that is preventing that result they would find themselves in agreement more often. For instance, the problem with "gay" marriage is totally the courts. So instead of writing a "social conservative" definition of marriage to be imposed by a federal constitutional amendment, write a totally conservative federal amendment that sets the standard for who can define marriage, setting the state legislatures and no one else, and not a court, federal or state as the only power for defining marriage. Simply give conservatives in the states what they need - keep the courts out of it. I think that amendment would have passed.


157 posted on 06/10/2006 9:44:11 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Wuli

WULI FOR CONGRESS! I agree absolutely that the problem with gay marriage is the courts (and, one could add grandstanding mayors). Your solution is spot-on.


165 posted on 06/10/2006 11:28:13 AM PDT by RedRover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | 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