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 ...
It will get overturned just as an isotope is inherently unstable.
Interesting we live in an age of nuclear bombs held by leftists accross the world...
Indeed, his marriage rate indicates he has a puppy dog syndrome with returning wagging tails to bad women.
Gingrich to gay man: Vote for Obama
Posted by
CNN’s Shawna Shepherd and Ashley Killough
(CNN) - Asked how he plans to engage the gay community in his bid for president, Newt Gingrich on Tuesday told a voter he wouldn’t be the right choice for those basing their decision on the issue of same-sex marriage.
“If that’s the most important (issue) to you, then you should be for Obama,” Gingrich told Scott Arnold, a man who identified himself as gay.
“Okay. I am, but thank you,” Arnold replied.
The comment ended a rather cordial exchange between the two at a campaign stop in Oskaloosa, Iowa.
Arnold, an adjunct professor at William Penn University, approached the former speaker, asking Gingrich how he would sway voters who disagreed with him on same-sex marriage.
“How do you plan to engage and get the hope of gay Americans and those who support them?” Arnold asked.
Gingrich replied saying he doesn’t expect to get the backing from voters solely focused on changing the definition of marriage.
“And I accept that that’s a reality,” Gingrich said.
Gingrich has frequently taken a conservative line on the issue. Last week, he signed a pledge with the National Organization for Marriage, promising, among many things, to back a constitutional amendment defining marriage between a man and woman.
“On the other hand, for those for whom it’s not the central issue in their life –if they care about job creation, if they care about national security, if they care about a better future for the country at large-then I think I’ll get their support,” Gingrich said.
Newt for homo marriage? He’s Toast.
I wouldn’t rely on smelly fish’s BS headline.
That’s the headline of the Wall St. J? So now you blame the messenger?
This was a rather remarkable exchange. I cant post videos but for those who want to see an honest politician for a change, just google Gingrich gay man Obama. It is very refreshing and enlightening.
If you know how to read, please see my post #45
It is an open question as to whether if one state legalizes gay marriage, and there is no federal prohibition, if every other state has to at least recognize gays married in other states.
And don't worry, eventually the supposedly "pro-business" folks will fall over themselves to support gay marriage once the ball gets rolling. Having to deal with employees/customers/business partners in states with different laws with regard to gay marriage will be deemed to be to complicated and bad for business.
For reasons like that, I don’t think the definition of marriage should be a states’ rights issue. I’m pretty sure the U.S. forced Utah to outlaw polygamy for a reason. The fundamental ways our society is structured can’t be different in different states. The federal constitutional amendment is the right way to go.
Folks, that was the byline in the Wall St.J. Stop blaming the messenger? Either Gingrich said it or he did not. If there is a “right” way to legalize gay marriage, I guess there is a “right” way to legalize polygamy; incest; and abortion (they have already done that).
What we need to open our eyes is to the fact that the long predicted Gingrich self-implosion by the political class has albeit sadly, occurred. There goes GA up in flames for him. By all accounts this is a 2-man race. Get used to it.
If Santorum were behind and Gingrich were in the lead, all of us, including yours truly, wold have clamored for Santorum to get out out. We all stood up and applauded when Gingrich won S.Carolina. That was then, this is now. The train has left the station.
We all joined the “resistance” to defeat Romney. We must now coalesce against the “one true conservative standing” (in Rush’s words) to defeat Romney. Santorum is Obama’s worst nightmare since he connects with the large swath of blue-collar voters in the crucial Rust Belt.
Dude, crack is wack.
Does this pertain to states that have CCW that is not recognized by states where it is outlawed or drinking age variances from state to state?
Strong leader on social issues? Glad to see you will be voting for Santorum.
Sure thing and I have heard reports there is a bridge in Brooklyn for sale. You are only fooling yourself with this load of bs.
Are we a country of laws? If so which law prevents citizens from amending their state constitution to either allow or ban homosexual marriage?
The WSJ doesn't like Newt anyway. They are in bed with Flipper and his running dog lackeys.
Newt's always doing this ~ using language correctly. His intellectual inferiors and his critics are always misusing language, or proving to us they don't know how to understand anything.
Shows just how intellectually bankrupt you are when you can’t face the truth of a news report; resort to polemic, and name-calling. All the spin about how Gingrich is against gay marriage is besides the point. In no uncertain terms he thinks there is a “right way” to legalize anything homosexuals do and by train of logic (if you could follow me), we can be against incest, polygamy, abortion, but there is always a “right way” to legalize the very rot that is infecting our society to the core. Hollywood today is giving Gingrich a standing ovation. And instead of having the integrity to say either he misspoke or he was dead wrong, you attack the bearer of news. This is the stuff that gives your guy a bad name- sometimes a candidate is judged by the company he keeps. No?
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.