Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cheney Supports Gay Marriage
politicalwire.com ^

Posted on 06/01/2009 1:08:50 PM PDT by Sub-Driver

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 241-257 next last
To: Jewbacca

Cheney’s position is the classic 18th Cen. Liberal position. Personally, although I think it is morally wrong, this decision should be left to the States. My real concern is people being sued for refusing to take part in the wedding, like the New Mexico photographer.


61 posted on 06/01/2009 1:38:23 PM PDT by Lou Budvis (Palin/Dick, Lynne or Liz Cheney '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
A marriage is between a male and a female. You cannot marry a male and male electrical plug, or a female and female piece of garden hose, You can get some electrical tape and make it work , Just as they can get a strap on, and imitate sex, but it isnt a marriage.

They can never make a baby either, they can raise a baby, but never make one...and in order for them to raise one, someone has to make it. I wonder if this will lower respect for child-bearing women. They may find themselves being treated not just as sex-objects but also as baby-making-objects???

62 posted on 06/01/2009 1:38:32 PM PDT by PreviouslyA-Lurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: jessduntno

God endorsed polygamy.


63 posted on 06/01/2009 1:38:42 PM PDT by Bushwacker777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: wiseprince

That’s why one can even blame Bush.

If not for the marriage benefits in his tax cuts, there wouldn’t have been a clamor for gay marriage.

It’s got more to do with asset management than anything else, IMO.....


64 posted on 06/01/2009 1:38:56 PM PDT by swarthyguy ("We may be crazy in Pakistan, but not completely out of our minds," ISI Gen. Ahmed Shujaa Pasha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca
It’s a classically conservative position to let freaks do whatever they want to themselves.

No it isn't. You seem to have no clue what conservatism is.

65 posted on 06/01/2009 1:39:26 PM PDT by Romulus ("Ira enim viri iustitiam Dei non operatur")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

I agree with Cheney. He has stated this position before.

Still, the GOP would benefit greatly, I think, if they take several debate topics away from the typical wedge issues that RATS like to bring up during election time and turn them into a state rights (sovereignty) issue. This includes abortion, gay rights, education, etc.

Most Americans would buy into the states right argument more so than the same ole debate argument of taking each head-on. MeThinks.


66 posted on 06/01/2009 1:39:45 PM PDT by 506Lake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calex59
Well, you have to realize he has a lesbian daughter. Would you abandon your child in such a case or would you stand behind them and support them? I will give Dick Cheney a pass on this one. BTW, the you in this comment is to everyone not just to the person I replied to.

You abandon your child when you take an immoral stand to satisfy their immoral life's choices.

You are true to your child, yourself, and ultimately God when you choose to do the right thing, no matter what the consequences.
67 posted on 06/01/2009 1:40:38 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

So was the Prophet Abraham and some gay guys in San Francisco moral equals?


68 posted on 06/01/2009 1:40:47 PM PDT by Bushwacker777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

I agree with Cheney. He has stated this position before.

Still, the GOP would benefit greatly, I think, if they take several debate topics away from the typical wedge issues that RATS like to bring up during election time and turn them into a state rights (sovereignty) issue. This includes abortion, gay rights, education, etc.

Most Americans would buy into the states right argument more so than the same ole debate argument of taking each head-on.

MeThinks.


69 posted on 06/01/2009 1:40:51 PM PDT by 506Lake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

“How about the federal ban on partial birth abortion Bush signed with Cheney as VP? Wouldnt that violate states rights as Scalia said (it was not challenged on that) it did?”

I never heard of a bondholder being told by the government to go screw, either...we are through the looking glass...I believe our best hope now is to absolutley return everything possible to States Rights issues, carve out some sanity and live there...


70 posted on 06/01/2009 1:41:15 PM PDT by jessduntno (July 4th, 2009. Washington DC. Gadsden Flags. Be There.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

i think i have come back to the conclusion that the state needs to get out of the marriage business all together, and change it to a civil union. Marriage is for the church. For the government it is simply the legal relationship for property, benefits, etc.


71 posted on 06/01/2009 1:42:30 PM PDT by ilgipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Excellent post, thanks for the reminder.


72 posted on 06/01/2009 1:42:53 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Dick says: "People ought to get a shot at that."
73 posted on 06/01/2009 1:42:57 PM PDT by dragonblustar ("... and if you disagree with me, then you sir, are worse than Hitler!" - Greg Gutfeld)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
After reading some of the replies on this thread I would put this headline on this story:

Cheney abandons reason and uses his power to move GOP to anti-God position which destroys our civilization's foundations

74 posted on 06/01/2009 1:43:23 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (They tell you that conservatism "can't win" because they don't believe in it. Duh...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

What is clear here is that Cheney is talking about a state’s right to recognize marriage. He is not talking about his religious beliefs, nor is he talking about his daughter. I think that because he isn’t talking about the latter two we can surmise that his statement ONLY is relevant to state’s rights and nothing else.


75 posted on 06/01/2009 1:43:24 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
GET CHANEY!

He's a traitor to the cause!!!

Get him!

But not until he has hammered on Obama for a few more weeks ;-)...

76 posted on 06/01/2009 1:43:57 PM PDT by ejonesie22 (Mitt Romney is a more subtle version of Arlen Specter with better hair...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

And the reason we don’t own Mexico today was because the US government (northern Republicans) did not want to admit Mixico into the union and divide it up since it was below the Mason-Dixon Line and would have increased the number of slave states. Just thihnk if Mexico had been a part of the US from the 1840s and could have been fully integrated into US cultural patterns. Thanks for nothing Lincoln.


77 posted on 06/01/2009 1:44:11 PM PDT by Bushwacker777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Romulus

No, I correct.

It’s a terminology thing, not a substantive point.


78 posted on 06/01/2009 1:44:26 PM PDT by Jewbacca (Yes, I am very hairy and good with small arms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

What’s his position on torture in a homosexual marriage?


79 posted on 06/01/2009 1:44:52 PM PDT by vox_freedom (If anyone wanted to know what would happen with a far, far left POTUS, it's here and now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lou Budvis
Cheney’s position is the classic 18th Cen. Liberal position. Personally, although I think it is morally wrong, this decision should be left to the States. My real concern is people being sued for refusing to take part in the wedding, like the New Mexico photographer.

No it is not.

In the 18th century, this was not an issue because it was UNIVERSALLY accepted as somethin you did not do, that is homosexuality.

If it was actually an issue they had to deal with at that time, we would already have a constitutional amendment barring homosexual marriage and defining marriage as only between one man and one woman.
80 posted on 06/01/2009 1:44:58 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 241-257 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson