Your previous posts did not include the word “LEGAL”. An individual does not have to argue the legal merits of an issue in order to legitimize it. There may be citizens who choose to recognize only the legality of an issue, but that does not devalue it’s validity.
To recognize an issue solely on it’s legal merit is absurd. If pedophilia was legal, does this therefore mean it is lawful? And if the answer is no, which it is, then why is it unlawful?
It is fair to say that to establish ‘truth’ in the validity of an issue is reasonable. I will say that the origin of truth is not in man, but God.
It is reasonable to conclude that you do not embrace God as your personal Lord, judging by the statements you have made. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that when hearing opposing views, you may dismiss a candidates position if he expresses his convictions according to moral law. That is fair enough, but if you’re suggesting that your position is one exercised by most, you’re wrong, my friend.
For if the moral issues did not matter, why are so many candidates addressing moral concerns? Because there are Americans that value these moral issues.
My meaning is very clear in what I wrote. I don't care what you or anyone else cares about in your private life--what motivates, say, your opposition to abortion--only what you care about in terms of government. Why would I have to stamp LEGAL on my comments, since this is a board about politics and government, not morality? One can have all the Bible-based values in the world, it doesn't matter WHERE one gets their values, only that they go about legitimizing laws in a LEGAL context--you can't go to the Supreme Court and say "Abortion should not be the law of the land because God says so."