Posted on 02/24/2012 3:06:09 PM PST by Steelfish
FEBRUARY 24, 2012 Gingrich Suggests There’s a ‘Right Way’ to Legalize Gay Marriage
By Danny Yadron
OLYMPIA, Wash.–In a break with Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich declined to outright attack a new law that allows gay marriage in this state, suggesting he is OK with states legalizing gay marriage through popular vote.
Asked at the state Capitol what he thought of states passing laws that allow gay marriage, the former House speaker responded, “I think at least they’re doing it the right way, which is going through voters, giving them a chance to vote and not having a handful of judges arbitrarily impose their will. I don’t agree with it, I would vote, ‘no,’ if it were on a referendum where I was but at least they’re doing it the right way.”
Gay-marriage bills recently passed in Washington state and Maryland could still face referendums from voters. Shortly after Washington’s governor signed the law this month, Mr. Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator, met with its opponents and argued it weakens marriage at a time of high divorce rates, according to the Associated Press.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...
The problem is who’s saying it. If Rick Sanctimonious said it, these same perps would be hailing it as a statement of supreme Constitutional wisdom.
We voted against homosexual (there is nothing gay about it) marriage here in California and judges struck it down.
Don't we have the right to make laws and have our judges enforce them, as opposed to 'judges' making laws?
I’ll note that you didn’t “misunderstand” Newt’s response, you intentionally “misrepresented” it. Please let us know your accepted model for how same-sex marriage can be legally outlawed if the lawmakers and population want it, short of a national constitutional amendment, which Newt supports.
Gingrich vows support for gay marriage ban
Newt Gingrich affirmed his support for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in a detailed response to a marriage pledge by a conservative Iowa group.
Is there a legal way to impose on me a gay married couple? Paying taxes for their recognition? A budget for it? Say what?
My buddy in NYC could not get his marriage license for a week because gays had overflowed the process. THis is utter horse crap.
Gay marriage is a not a civil right. Heck, the gays have declared heterosexual marriage and birth not a civil right.
I should not have to hire a gay married person, enough said.
Gingrich is talking about imposition or legalization?
What part of the word war have they not understood that is coming from these groups? THis is genocide, folkes, GENOCIDE, under the guise of protecting them from harassment.
And men who actually know right from wrong should hold their tongues? Isn’t it the responsibility of “leaders” to attempt to point out the difference?
The title is a misrepresentation of what Gingrich said.
Hi! I’m a proud Gingribot. The truth is, the gate was left open a long time ago, not by Newt but by Liberals. Homosexuality is now acceptable, and gay marriage will be mainstream. It is never going to be overturned, the same as abortion is never going to be overturned. Gingrich is smart enough to know this, he didn’t create it, he doesn’t agree with it and he is telling the truth. He merely suggests that states voter referendums is the best approach. You are trying to suggest that Newt supports gay marriage which is the real spin. I suspect your guy is Santorum, I guarantee you if we would be unlucky enough to have him as president, he won’t and can’t do a damn thing about it. He just talks a big game to get peoples pants in a wad and thus, votes.
THe muslims are going to make their claims for 4 wives and 60 children and the budget is going to crack.
THis is total hypocrite havoc and imposition of stuff we do not need.
And do not let me get started about the “right for the pooper”. THis is why Jews circumcized men. In Islam women want circumcision so as to encourage men to be gay, by the way, because it removes comfort then from both sexes. And this is where we are headed.
Women are going to get destroyed when men go to men, there is no question about it. The term barefoot and pregnant coming from feminists was taught to them by maniulative leftist gay men, by the way.
And here I thought that the spewing of lies and deception was limited to the liberals. Who knew that the practice is well practiced within the belly of the pious?
There are certain actions that are just outright immoral. This is one of them. Legislating, executive order, judicial decree or referendum doesn’t make it right. It also doesn’t matter that the headline was a misrepresentation of the Speaker’s position.
If you have to resort to crap like that to try to influence people... you need to recognize your position is probably wrong to begin with.
That’s not exactly the point. The results of plebiscites can be just as wrong, just as corrupt, as Supreme Court decisions or acts of Congress. Do candidates for election just accept the wrong decisions? Oh, well. I can’t wait for the votes coming from plebiscites that hold the rich responsible for all federal and state taxes or outlaw home AND private education of any kind.
************************
Hold on to your seat. This is just the beginning.
Newt Gingrich is proposing a Constituional Amendment to ban Gay Marriage.
No Spin, Just Fact.
The people of America have opened ‘Pandora’s box’, and we will suffer the same fate as Sodom and Gomorrah...just a matter of time.
Newt's views about this subject.
Gingrich pledges support for constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage
Easy, right is right, wrong is wrong. Either a person thinks gay marriage is right, or they think it is wrong.
Newt loses here because he misses the fact that the whole point of gay marriage is to force religions to marry queers or be punished.
This is the Newt problem. His principles are weak.
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.