Posted on 02/10/2011 6:25:57 AM PST by Notary Sojac
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) said Wednesday evening she has no objection to the participation of gay Republicans at this weekend's gathering of conservatives in Washington.
Palin said she didn't see anything wrong with the participation of GOProud, a group of gay Republicans, at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), which runs Thursday through Saturday.
"I don't have a problem with different, diverse groups that are involved in political discourse, and having a convention to talk about what the answers are to their problems that face America," Palin said Wednesday on Fox News when asked about GOProud.
Palin isn't participating in the conference, and she's declined previous invitations, despite CPAC's role as a cattle call for possible Republican presidential candidates.
But other prominent conservatives have said they're skipping the conference. The conservative Heritage Foundation and other socially conservative groups withdrew due to the inclusion of GOProud. And with those groups out, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) followed suit. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) also declined participation, though it's unclear if that decision is linked to GOProud.
Aside from DeMint, though, the other Republicans mulling a run for president are slated to speak or participate at the conference, hoping in part to boost their standing in the closely watched straw poll of attendees.
Palin suggested that conservatives had more important issues to worry about than which groups were attending the conference.
"People are losing their jobs; they're losing homes. We're still engaged in a war," she said. "There are so many life-changing, life-and-death issues out there in front of us. You know, we'd better be concentrating on what is really important here and not going kind of tit-for-tat as people are positioning themselves for 2012."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Not arguing that at all. Jesus knew they were full of sin.My question is, “How did Jesus approach people in sin”? What was his pattern? Just curious? IF you truly look at that question then you run into the same problem that the pharisees had....
“..... you eat and drink with sinners,prostitutes and tax collectors” What was Jesus response...? “It is the Ill that need the doctor”
My question is then, how are we to show up to people when we are the doctor? Mock and condemn? Just curious....
He told the woman at the well who had 5 husbands and was now living with a man, not her husband 'to go and sin no more'(Jn.4)
Are we allowing them into the conservative movement to convert them from being homosexuals?
Or are we accepting them as homosexuals?
What I like is allowing the free exchange of ideas, even if I don't agree with those ideas. That's one reason I enjoy FR. There are plenty of people that don't agree with me all the time, but I'd never ask Jim to toss 'em.
Tell me your view on GOProud at CPAC.
I already have. That's why you warned me not to be so vocal in the first place. (Good grief.)
First of all, she doesn't have the power to allow or not allow this. Second of all, I see nothing wrong with allowing dissenting points of view. We aren't the libs who have to cover their ears and go "lah, lah, lah, I can't hear you!" when someone says something with which they disagree.
The owner disagrees. We have no obligation to allow dissent a platform on FR.
Who reads FR? How many accounts on FR? What does FR stand for? Where is FR going?
As an organization, we cannot be both for and against homosexuality, abortion, big government, border and national security, etc. I don't know about others, but if we must choose, I choose to be on the right side of each and every issue. Why should FR use its limited resources to allow liberals, homosexualists, abortionists, big spenders, big taxers, big government solutions advocates, gun grabbers, pacifists, isolationists, environmentalists, open-borders lobbyists, etc, ply their trade on FR? Well, more and more lately, we don't. And, apparently, that has pissed off a lot of big tent, true blue RINO types and the herd is stampeding. Let them go.
“He told the woman at the well who had 5 husbands and was now living with a man, not her husband ‘to go and sin no more’(Jn.4)”
Yes on the first part, but you are incorrect on the second. (not that Jesus would want her to continue in sin, but you are referring to woman caught in adultery)
You said “Are we allowing them into the conservative movement to convert them from being homosexuals?”
What are we called to do first? Run a conservative political movement or save the lost?
Think about the good Samaritan story. What if it went like this... There was once a known homosexual heading to CPAC when he was attacked and left for dead on the side of the road... If you held the view you do today, which person would you be in that story???
You said, “Or are we accepting them as homosexuals?”
Well we accept them as sinners, just like you are. Remember the story of the prodical son? Did it say, only when the son came begging on his hands and knees for forgiveness did the Father turn toward him....??? NO it says this... EVEN WHEN THE SON WAS STILL FAR OFF THE FATHER CAME RUNNING TO THE SON. Did you get that? The FATHER came running. Not the son. That is the nature of God. While we were still deep in Sin God traded his perfect Son for our lives. Not when we got our Sh!t together but while we were still steeped in it.
Here is the question, can Jesus transform a Homosexual through just a sense of love for that person. Just by modeling the Love of the Father? If the answer is no, then your God is limited and not worthy of being served. If the answer is Yes, then, we need to model that even at the risk that they may never fully surrender to Christ. We are not called to make sure that happens. We are called to model it.
But, but , but what if this guy comes to my church and sits next to me, and all my friends are wondering ..... ? See this is where you sacrifice for the kingdom, not money but your reputation. Not always easy.
What you are leaving out is that the son came home. He changed. He repented and came "home". When we change and repentant, yes, God meets us and rejoices just as that father did. But something is required of us first just as that son had his eyes opened.
Then why are you dissenting with you comments? ;)
LOL Infiltration? Because I believe it is okay to allow other points of view than yours and mine to be heard there? Um, okay.
Just as Jim said we do not have to allow dissenting voices on FR neither do we have to give them a platform at CPAC. But you support both. And both are destructive to Conservatives.
It most certainly is infiltration. Liberal views pollute the Conservative message. We have no obligation to give them a platform to spew dissent either at CPAC or FR.
We been robbed!
Or, maybe.....just maybe.....the The Corrupt Bass Turds in The Professional Left Media have been wrong about her being a right-wing, extremist, hate-monger, homophobe.
Nahhhhhhhh!
Really? Have you checked my posting history? Have you seen how I have spoken out against the homo agenda, against abortion on demand, against radical feminism (and so on). No, obviously, you haven't. You are just jerking your knee and generalizing because I've said something you don't agree with.
Just as Jim said we do not have to allow dissenting voices on FR
But we do have dissenting voices on FR. Yes, Jim owns it and has set limits on that, but there are dissenting opinions. Otherwise, you and I would not be having this discussiong.
. . .neither do we have to give them a platform at CPAC.
If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to participate in or support CPAC.
I support exchanging ideas, even when people don't agree with me. Sorry you have a problem dealing with anything other than someone who dittos exactly what you say.
And both are destructive to Conservatives.
Really? Conservatism is going to fall apart if it is exposed to anything other than what you view as an acceptable idea? Wow, you don't have much faith in conservatism.
LOL Okay, call it whatever you like.
Liberal views pollute the Conservative message.
You really think conservative ideas are so weak and illogical that they lose whenever another idea is presented? Maybe that's why we are disagreeing here. I happen to believe that conservative ideas are strong and logical and can stand up in any open debate against liberal ideas.
We have no obligation to give them a platform to spew dissent either at CPAC or FR.
Who is this "we" you are talking about? Does the "we" include only those who agree with you on everything? It certainly seems that way. Perhaps you should start your own version of CPAC. Then you can have complete control over who participates.
I've seen you post. Look at this thread. You think "Free speech" means we have to allow a platform, provided by us, to dissenters. We don't. They have many platforms and want to take over ours in order to SILENCE us. Did you NOT see what the head of GOProud said?!
Guess Who's Coming to CPAC? (Breitbart & Norquist Gush Over GOProud in Homosexual Publication)
...Barron looks at the landscape: "We've said all along that we don't think that the conservative movement is unwelcoming to gay people. There is a fringe element. A really nasty, anti-gay, bigoted element. And we have smoked them out, and we have marginalized them."
Do you understand what he is saying?
It is the Camel’s Nose. They share a platform and then take it over and silence us. The concept is easy to understand. Look at what Barron said.
"It is useless to to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."-- Jonathan Swift
Yup. They don’t see it coming until it’s over.
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.