Posted on 08/26/2010 6:28:21 PM PDT by DesertRenegade
Same-sex marriage is back as a front-burner issue in American politics.
First, on August 4, a federal judge in San Francisco held that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, striking down part of the California Constitution defining marriage as one man and one woman. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ordered an expedited schedule to consider this case, with arguments to be held in December.
Second, former RNC chairman and 2004 Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman came out this week, announcing he’s homosexual, and pushing the Republican Party to support the homosexual-rights agenda. Republicans leaders are beginning to weigh in on where they stand, including on the agenda’s centerpiece: Redefining marriage.
The Republican Party has an official position on same-sex marriage. It’s found in the 2008 GOP platform, which is the clear and uncontestable Republican position until the 2012 convention. When one of your authors (Ken Blackwell) was serving as vice chairman of the GOP Platform Committee, there was a singular focus on producing a party platform that fully reflects the vast majority of Republican Party members.
The GOP platform could not be more explicit: Marriage is the union of one man and one woman. The fundamental institution of human civilization should be preserved as it has been known through the entirety of American history and Western civilization. Supporters of same-sex marriage had the full opportunity to make their case to the party. They made it, and they lost.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
This is the axiomatic statement of the day. And if we let these buggers get their way, then we can look forward to pedos, trannies, people who are into animals, polygamists and every other god awful plague becoming more vocal in coming years.
I really don’t know why we Americans seem to now have the compulsion to turn religious and moral decision making authority over to politicians... the most despicable and amoral form of life on Earth.
Marriage is the province of religion; we need to keep it there.
Did you get your dessert along with the meal when you were a kid? Of course not. There is a last GOLDEN chance to strike a death blow to this democrat party, which has brought us this 25 year march of depravity.
It’s insanity to focus on the small stuff. Keep your eye on the ball and destroy the democrats. The repubs will see what happened, and then we make more demands. Then the rollback begins.
It’s sheer lunacy to throw this one last chance away. A loss here will solidify Obama, and if you think things are bad now, it can get a LOT worse.
It’s like those bypassed islands in WWII. Full of heavily armed Japanese, yes. But they all whithered when we finally destroyed the government in Tokyo.
Bypass democrat distracting messes that divide our forces,,, lets go straight for the the heart of the beast. Everything else is nothing but a distraction.
We didn’t fight every island Japan held,, but they are all gone today. We went for the heart.
What is the Democrat partys official position on this, and do the blacks and Hispanics know what it is?
“It’s irrelevant because the GOP is not stupid “
I agree,, and one further, i think this whole gay thing coming now is specifically designed to weaken the coming counter-Obama revolt.
Try to vote for conservatives and hold the Repubs feet to the fire.”
I agree, and heaven only knows what other things we dare not dream of, can happen if we kill the party that has brough so much depravity to America.
A small example, Kagan the lesbo just got confirmed. Sure would be nice to have a repub senate for his next appointment. As someone else here mentioned, if gay marriage comes to America, it’ll come through the courts. We must have majorities to stop that front too.
I truly feel we can achieve so much more than we’ve ever dared to dream we could. I think we can stop them.
Exactly. Our civilization—what’s left of it—has gone stark raving mad!
The Democrats’ position is that of “civil unions” marriage doesn’t need to be redefined, but they can have whatever legal rights are associated with marriage. The Democrats take this position to get the votes, but they nominate or appoint liberal justices who rule in court in favor of redefining marriage. The best thing we can do right now is hold the GOP feet to the fire for any reckless spending they perform, and more likely than not a few will get the message from incumbents being kicked out of office. Once the GOP gets the message that bailouts are bad, or that reckless spending and deficits are not in the public interest, then we can really grill them on a long set of issues, including immigration, counterterrorism, and much more.
We can win if we have an engaged people. They have slept too long. I think they now recognize the danger. And vote accordingly.
Yup. Who could have ever envisioned this? My grandparents jaws would be on the floor. And that ANYONE would think it's inevitable is a defeatist.
I may agree with you there. However, the big front is grilling the Democrats and the RINOs on economics and immigration (i.e. failure at national security). Grill them for the bailouts, and grill them for largely doing little to none about the lawless situation on our nation’s borders. After this, when public pressure is shown that matters (i.e. incumbents being kicked out of office) we can take other issues to case.
That makes no sense whatsoever. You are falling into the exact trap they want. Once you endorse and legitimize their lifestyle like that, they will go to the Courts over separate but equal. We need to speak frankly and honestly about their unhealthy lifestyle choice.
Reagan had the courage to speak out against these degenerates, why don't we?
Society has always regarded marital love as a sacred expression of the bond between a man and a woman. It is the means by which families are created and society itself is extended into the future. In the Judeo-Christian tradition it is the means by which husband and wife participate with God in the creation of a new human life. It is for these reasons, among others, that our society has always sought to protect this unique relationship. In part the erosion of these values has given way to a celebration of forms of expression most reject. We will resist the efforts of some to obtain government endorsement of homosexuality. -- Ronald Reagan, July 12, 1984.
If you corner Christians by taking over their party and reversing the parties agenda, then you cannot expect them to join in and vote for Satan himself.
If you destroy the party, then you lose it’s adherents, that is the way reality works.
Yep, it’s absurd to cowtow to the homosexual electorate which is probably less than 1% of the population.
“I believe they should go the route of supporting “civil unions”, where the gay folks can have all the same legal recognition/status as married people.
...
It would be a win/win.”
(the following is as I recall reading of a chain of events, it’s close, but probably not perfect)
In 1990, Richard Darman (Bush-41 Budget Director and so-called budget hawk) came running into the Oval Office all excited, telling the President he FINALLY had VICTORY over the Democrats (who controlled Congress), as the Democrats agreed to freeze spending, and therefore the deficit would be wiped out. He had it right there, ON PAPER, with their signatures. Of course there was one other detail - the President had to agree to reverse his key pledge and allow increased taxes. The President agreed - and Bush found himself thrown out of office in 2 years. Needless to say, the paper the Dems had signed had all the credibility (to them) as the latest Soviet Arms Treaty.
For the first 4980 years of recorded human history, the term marriage (in whatever language, in whatever culture) meant ONE MAN and ONE WOMEN, and in most cases it was considered worthy of promotion by government (in some way), as a means of achieving a healthy society. Only in the past 20 years, have people decided that THEY KNOW BETTER and the concept is outdated. The proper response to the people is simply to say: GO TO HELL, we don’t have the vanity to think we know better than roughly 300 generations of human history.
The idea that we give the Democrats half a victory, or really two thirds of a victory, by recognizing “civil unions” is SICK. It is no different than Darman (like Chamberlain) holding that piece of paper and declaring VICTORY.
No, victory ONLY occurs when you defeat someone, not when you give them 67% of what they want (and a path to achieve the other 33%). THAT IS CALLED SUICIDE.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
Both lists. This goes way, way beyond a niche "homosexual agenda" issues. Not that the homosexual agenda doesn't spread out and grab almost everyone sooner or later. But to have the GOP cave in to the homosexual agenda in any way at all not only leaves actual conservatives with NO WHERE TO GO (any GOP officials reading this? You should!) but Is a - please read carefully - GUARANTEED LOSS!
Yes, my friends, a guaranteed losing proposition. If people want social liberalism, or liberal socialism, they know exactly which lever to pull. The "D".
If the GOP becomes merely "D-lite" they are lost, toast, history, ruined and desreve to be thrown into the garbage can of history.
This effort to push the homosexual agenda within the Republican party is the effort of "gay" activist infiltrators and most likely GOP-ers who have skeletons in their closets.
If this happens, then it is end of the GOP.
But then I suspect that the GOP is a lot more the “Gay Old Party” than the “Grand Old Party”, so it will come to that.
It’s the militant homosexual agenda pusher who are forcing “marriage” via same sex marriage into politics.
Conservatives are merely defending the default, status quo, historical, reality based truth.
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.