Posted on 09/05/2007 3:43:28 PM PDT by papasmurf
The influential Arlington Group, a coalition of prominent leaders of the so-called "religious right, has decided to withhold their planned support for the fledgling campaign of former Senator Fred Thompson.
(Excerpt) Read more at update08.foxnews.com ...
List of threats:
1. Big Government.
2. Big Government.
3. Big Government.
4. What part of this progression eludes you?
I don’t think banning an immoral practice is “big government”. Other forms of big government ARE a threat, but so is an attack on life and marriage.
Look, I am not willing to get into another debate about this. I will think things over and come up with my own opinions. Perhaps my current one will change. But typing all morning won’t solve anything and I have other things to do today.
Seriously.
Just kick back and puff a doobie, mon....
The states DO have a role in the amendment process, so it’s not like they’d be left out of this.
Other FReepers, and also politicians want this banned at the federal level. I told you, I’ll think about this. But I am not going to type for two hours about it.
The proper punctuation for sentence that begins "It may not be written in the Constitution, but..." is with a period after the word "but".
IMHO, that's a decision based on religious convictions, and we're already operation under the assumtion that anyone with any particular religious convictions wouldn't be doing it anyway.
Credibility Scale:
100: Larry Craig saying "I am not gay"
0.01 G8 Diplomat saying "I am NOT saying 'Always trust the feds'"
And how would you know what I sincerely mean? If you don’t want to believe me, fine, but were this the case of Roe v Wade as I were talking about there, I would not say always trust them. Many times I don’t.
What part of “I’ll think about this” don’t you understand? There is no need to continue picking apart all my posts.
Well OK, this has been one of my more insightful debates, and I will think about this. Obviously my opinions aren’t perfect, and they could change. But for now, I’m off for the morning. I’ve got other things to do.
were=was
Man, does Fox have a hard on for Fred!
yeah, they’re po’d. He didn’t make the debate, and his new manager, lacy<?>, fired their guy.
Cameron is a turd.
I’m kinda glad they’re officially ‘soft’ on Fred. Gives Fred’s liberal enemies one less thing to grouse about.
The government officially sanctioning sodomite “weddings” doesn’t count as “big government?” Why is it that you “libertarians” are so intent on seeing to it that the government has the power to officially endorse the revolting deviant crimes against nature performed by sodomite perverts? Don’t libertarians usually want the government not to do things? But in this case you want them to be able to do something really sick, while conservatives are fighting to prevent the government from doing something. I guess in this case it’s we conservatives who are the real libertarians, while the “sodomy is a god-given right” crowd are determined to see that big government have the power to officially endorse homosexuality.
Good post. I agree.
Guess whatever you want.
I’ve learned to expect that questioning whether the federal governmet has a legitimately granted or intended role in legislating and controlling any “moral” issue is going to result in accusations of condoning, encouraging, or even engaging in that activiey from you.
Everyone knows the federal government has no power over marriage. That’s why an amendment is needed. Why a libertarian would oppose an amendment which would restrict the government’s power is obvious. It’s because you are determined to use the violent power of big government to wage a culture war against the “religious right” you hate so much. Game on.
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.