Replies

Yes, he did. But he said they shouldn’t be forced on any other state, and he said he PERSONALLY OPPOSED THEM, which shows that his position is a “states rights” position.

Rudy previously said he SUPPORTED THEM.

Civil unions are not like abortion. Abortion is about the right to life of a human being. It is a law-and-order issues, a respect-for-life issue, an issue of the basis for the foundation of our country, that all men are created equal and have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

So for a candidate to say that they oppose abortion BUT that women have a right to choose them anyway is contradictory.

But civil unions are not about destroying another person’s liberty, they are simply very bad policy for the country OR a community.

But the government doesn’t exist to protect us from our own stupidity, and if a state wants to destroy it’s own society by using tax dollars to support gay unions, it doesn’t hurt the rest of us, only the voters of that state, and if it’s not the courts imposing the rules the people of that state can protect themselves through their legislative process, or they can move to a sane state.

So, so long as the courts are prevented from imposing gay unions, and so long as each state is protected from civil unions approved in other states, it makes sense for a person who opposes civil unions to still argue for the right of a state to choose them.

I don’t know if it’s been clarified or not, but Thompson did say on Fox Sunday that the matter of civil unions should be left to the states. That is a fact.

Mr. zook,
You overlooked dirtboy's full context quote (#55 on this thread) from Fox news which also makes you complicit in pulling things out of context, just like your friend Veronica. Intentional or a lie? Even a casual observer might say the latter.

[From post #55] Nice job lifting a quote out of context, Veronica. Now, let’s go to the transacript:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258222,00.html

WALLACE: Gay rights.

THOMPSON: Gay rights? I think that we ought to be a tolerant nation. I think we ought to be tolerant people. But we shouldn’t set up special categories for anybody.

And I’m for the rights of everybody, including gays, but not any special rights.

WALLACE: So, gay marriage? You’re against. THOMPSON: Yes. You know, marriage is between a man and a woman, and I don’t believe judges ought to come along and change that.

WALLACE: What about civil unions?

THOMPSON: I think that that ought to be left up to the states. I personally do not think that that is a good idea, but I believe in many of these cases where there’s real dispute in the country, these things are not going to be ever resolved.

But we shouldn’t set up special categories for anybody.

Whereas Rudy pushed for gay hate crimes legislation. There is NO COMPARISON between Fred and Rudy once the details are presented. Just as there is NO COMPARISON between Fred and Rudy on abortion. And guns. And global warming. And...