Posted on 11/16/2007 8:06:00 PM PST by Josh Painter
HOLLYWOOD, Fla. — Cautioning against a federal solution to the controversy over gay marriage, Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson on Friday applauded a Florida group for "taking care of business at home" by seeking a statewide ban on same-sex marriages.
Thompson, who along with other GOP hopefuls has aggressively courted social conservatives before Florida's Jan. 29 primary, spoke to a Florida Family Policy Council dinner audience of more than 300.
The group is trying to get a referendum on the 2008 Florida ballot defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman and forbidding recognition of any other type of union "that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof."
Thompson said the controversy over the definition of marriage is "a totally judicially-made problem" and drew applause when he blasted judges who "make it up as they go along."
In a break with some social conservatives, Thompson does not support a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage. But he supports an amendment that would allow states to recognize such marriages only if they are approved by voters or legislatures rather than judges. Thompson's amendment would also specify that no state would have to recognize a same-sex marriage approved in another state.
While not specifically addressing the issue of a federal marriage amendment in his remarks Friday, Thompson told the group that the federal government is a "weak partner" that should not be relied upon.
"The best solution begins at home, and let's keep it that way," Thompson said. "That's why it's so important that people in this room and others that have joined you are doing what you're doing with this marriage amendment here in the state. You're not waiting for somebody else to take care of it. You're taking care of business at home..."
(Excerpt) Read more at palmbeachpost.com ...
Actually, my family left South Bend in 1965(I was 12)
My dad was a Professor of English at Notre Dame, and he had a fight with Hesburgh. I loved South Bend, and hated Boston from day one.
“This was a thread about Fred and then the Mittheads jumped in to bash Fred (as usual) with the same tired old horse manure that has been debunked over and over again here at FR (as usual), and so the Fredheads then handed the Mittheads their azzes (as usual). And now, apparently the Mittheads are bawling about it like the whining crybabies they are (as usual).”
YOU ARE RAPIDLY BECOMING ONE OF MY FAVORITE frEEPERS !
Comes under the heading of:
Don’t start none, won’t be none...
I hear lots of talk about Romney and Guiliani. Even Huckabee. Not so much about Fred. He better make a mover pretty quick or he’ll just be a footnote to this campaign.
Instead of countering SD with positive support of Fred’s program almost all the posts are he usual anti-Mitt smears. Why don’t you defend your candidate?
He has some very interesting stuff there about an amendment that would apparently block judicial review of certain types of legislation. I’d like to know how that would work.
Awww shucks....[blush/]
There is nothing like the smell of fried Mittheads in the morning (or evening, or afternoon, or anytime....:))
Feel free to read the article and look into Fred’s work to catch a glimpse into his mindset and see how this would play.
We are living in strange times. Where are the F’ing conservatives??
I agree with FRed’s position, and his reasoning. So does the National Right to Life Council, and many others.
yeah, but our guy was behind it to help stop mpeople like Myth.
Besides, it’s not our guy who tried to tax contributions and eliminate PACS altogether, now is it?
Nor is it our guy who pushed a socialistic mandatory health care program that advertises $50.00 abortions.
Nor is it our guy who lost 33,000 members of his own party in four years.
Nor is our guy who killed off 233,000 jobs inbhis home State in four years.
Nor is our guy the number 8 rated RINO in the Country.
That video is just...wrong! I hope that’s not you. If it is, I love it!
Wow, that’s an extrapolated twist of the truth.
FRed has NEVER said that. he said people have a right to do what Fred Thompson disagrees with IF their State legalizes it.
Well, whoop-de-do!
Me, I don't much like the guy. He has all the sincerity of Hillary Clinton, but can't match her wit and charm.
I would guess that your only proof of that statement is your Gay & Lesbian admittance card?
WRONG.
Saundra Duffy, the notorious Romuloid, did that in - get this - Post No. 2. It took just THAT long for the Romuloids to step in to hijack the thread. You don't expect FRed supporters to simply sit back and let that happen, do you?
WRONG.
Saundra Duffy, the notorious Romuloid, did that in - get this - Post No. 2. It took just THAT long for the Romuloids to step in to hijack the thread. You don't expect FRed supporters to simply sit back and let that happen, do you?
This is what I’m coming to expect of Fred supporters — adolescent smears, little reason, lots of rhyme.
This was a thread about Fred and the Fredheads turned it into an anti-Romney thread. Very telling.
WRONG.
Saundra Duffy, the well known Mitt Romney supporter, did that in - get this - Post No. 2. It took just THAT long for the Romney supporters to step in to hijack the thread. You don't expect FRed supporters to simply sit back and let that happen, do you?
Maybe that will be less provocative to your injured sensibilities. But, there have been a number of folks on this thread pointing out the same thing: the very second post on this thread about Fred Thompson's remarks to a like-minded group in Florida was a Romney supporter's attempt to hijack the thread. That's the substance of my post - and others.
I don't expect an apology, whether from you, Saundra Duffy, or any of the other Mitt Romney supporters who think that their candidate is just so superior that they are licensed to go around to other threads and try to hijack them with impugnity.
No. We're going to fight back, sir. Contribute positively to the thread please, or absent yourself from the discussion.
This strategy won’t work because Marriage granted by one state has to be honored by another state. This is not the same as abortion issue.
There is only one answer - FMA or NOT. There is no middle ground.
*Looks around for GIGANTIC bugs.....*
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.