From a related post of yours:
It is not a point of setting the morals aside. You just won’t get the necessary power if your sole message is morality, even if it is mixed with fairness and financial prudence.
No, I don't think I am misunderstanding your position.
Your attempt to minimize the defense of one of the cornerstones of our Republic in deference to financial matters, which are important, is IMHO gets many conservatives ticked.
You want the moral question separated from the financial restraint and good government question and you cannot do that. It is all related.
Fighting for the sacredness of Marriage is fighting for the foundation of Western Civilization and Our Country. You can keep hammering away on the walls and the ceiling which are the financial issues but if you don't support the foundation the house is not worth anything.
Fairness and financial prudence is a result of exercising morality. Preaching and defending morality touches all aspects of life.
We have to battle evil hard on all fronts.
That was NOT what I advocated. I never minimized it. From my own quote that you cited:
It is not a point of setting the morals aside. You just won’t get the necessary power if your sole message is morality, even if it is mixed with fairness and financial prudence.
Then there's this from you: You want the moral question separated from the financial restraint and good government question and you cannot do that. It is all related.
That is NOT what I wrote. You are bearing false witness.
My opinion is simple: Morality alone won't win the power that is necessary to bring change, but morality mixed with other important issues WILL. Remember, I live in California - - we didn't win our elections.