Posted on 04/27/2007 3:10:50 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
In a startling departure from his previously stated position on civil unions, Mayor Giuliani came out to The New York Sun yesterday evening in opposition to the civil union law just passed by the New Hampshire state Senate.
" Mayor Giuliani believes marriage is between one man and one woman. Domestic partnerships are the appropriate way to ensure that people are treated fairly," the Giuliani campaign said in a written response to a question from the Sun. "In this specific case the law states same sex civil unions are the equivalent of marriage and recognizes same sex unions from outside states. This goes too far and Mayor Giuliani does not support it."
The Democratic governor of New Hampshire, John Lynch, has said publicly that he will sign the civil union law.
On a February 2004 edition of Fox News's "The O'Reilly Factor," Mr. Giuliani told Bill O'Reilly, when asked if he supported gay marriage, "I'm in favor of civil unions."
He also said, "Marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman." Asked by Mr. O'Reilly in the interview how he would respond to gay Americans who said being denied access to the institution of marriage violated their rights, Mr. Giuliani said: "That's why you have civil partnerships. So now you have a civil partnership, domestic partnership, civil union, whatever you want to call it, and that takes care of the imbalance, the discrimination, which we shouldn't have." In 1998, as mayor of New York City, Mr. Giuliani signed into law a domestic partnership bill that a gay rights group, the Empire State Pride Agenda, hailed as setting "a new national benchmark for domestic partner recognition."
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
Aren’t those called tap pants?
I’m with ya.
Gotta run out.
I’ll be back!
:0)
You mean to tell me Juti did not match her underwear to her outerwear?
That's disgraceful.
How is Juti going to look sitting in the Cabinet---unmatched and everything?
Like a slut, that's what.
Luckily heth not Thuperman-—”ith a bird, ith a plane..........ith ThuperRooty.”
Who was wearing the ones with the skid marks??
I think they're called trap-door pants.
To suggest that 3rd trimester abortions are not permitted by Roe vs. Wade is incorrect. There are still ten States that allow abortions after fetal viability. Thus, abortions can still occur in the third trimester should any State so decide. Rudy is only a very recent convert to the anti-PBA side of the debate. He has previously been opposed to such a ban. He does however still agrees that Roe vs Wade is settled law. The two justices Bush II appointed to the Court agree with Rudy as neither suggested in the PBA decision that the original ruling in Roe vs Wade was unconstitional. Only Judge Thomas and Judge Scalia have consistently ruled that the Roe vs Wade decision was unconstitutional. They reaffirmed that position in the PBA case.
That’s disgraceful.”
She might have gotten lucky and picked up a matching set from one of Rooty’s queer friends?
What circumstances?
“Could those be openings in the back door? You are in fine form this afternoon, Liz.”
roflmao
“Who was wearing the ones with the skid marks??”
I think his queer friends have the skid marks front and back. (yuck).
Read my Lisp, no more Rooty underwear jokes.
Aw, Beagle, thasth juth not fair!
Giuliani at Gracie Mansion dancing with Howard Koeppel,one of
the openly gay couple Giuliani lived with, after ditching his wife and
kids to be with his mistress.
LOL! I was wondering who would take that bait. :-)
I'm just relating what I saw. Feel free to check with others who were here.
Banning for personal attacks, that's laughable. Personal attacks are made all the time...
It is subjective, banning, but in many cases the poster was warned to stop and chose not to.
IMHO, Jim was not in the mood to tolerate a whole lot of belligerence, and it was easy to see in his posts.
I may be wrong about this, but it seemed to me that there were some who recognized that Jim had a zero tolerance attitude and purposely goaded him with the intention of getting banned.
We're back to support for Rudy.
Be that as it may, it does all eventually come back to Rudy. But not "just because someone supported him", but because they pleasured in throwing it in Jim's face.
That's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
I guess that true. Okay, its Friday.
A NEW YORK INSULT TO MR. ARAFAT
He did not simply bar Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat from a city-sponsored concert for the 50th anniversary of the United Nations -- a concert to which Mr. Arafat had been invited and given tickets. The mayor had his minions go into Lincoln Center after the concert had begun and dish Mr. Arafat further insult by removing him from the hall.
That was the Washington Post. It said he had been given tickets, but it says it was a city-sponsored concert.
Then there is this from Newsday: Giuliani's Snub: Shows No Control
BY THROWING YASSER Arafat out of a concert to which he held tickets, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani may have not only breached U.S. diplomatic protocol but also abused his authority.The White House and the State Department have condemned the mayor for his "unfortunate" bad manners during the 50th anniversary of the UN. And it's no wonder: Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Arafat had produced an invitation, from the UN chief of protocol, to the New York Philharmonic concert, which itself was underwritten by a corporate sponsor and hosted by the mayor and the City Host Committee.
This one said he had a ticket, then said he had an invitation, and that it had corporate, not city, sponsorship.
I no longer though "know" the facts of the matter. Apparently everybody DOES get to have their own set of facts.
More like practicing for the leather bars.
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.