Posted on 02/24/2012 3:06:09 PM PST by Steelfish
Why don’t you give us the courtesy of saying how the byline in the Wall St. J article is misleading? Are you saying that Gingrich does not believe that there is a “right way” of legalizing homosexual marriage? Yes or no?
What Gingrich personally thinks about gay marriage, incest, bestiality, polygamy, or abortion is utterly irrelevant to whether or not a “right way” can be found to legitimize evil that has Hollywood applauding, and is rotting the foundations of our society. You see, Red Steel, some of us still believe our rights come from Nature’s God and evil can never be “legitimated” by anyone or any people or any vote. Of course, looks like you don’t agree with us. But then have the courage to say so.
I can understand that, but why run to the middle while you haven’t wrapped up the base?
President Newt Gingrich—”Our beloved republic deserves nothing less.”
No it does not.
The article begins: 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.
There is no mention of Romney.
Travel on the “Hershey Highway” is an accident looking for a place to happen for Republican candidates. Quidado!
It is misleading as I have showed you up this thread. The Fox article title is accurate. This one puts into people's minds that Gingrich is for gay marriage. That's the furthest away from the truth as should know.
You don't seem to get it dude. All Gingrich said in this gotcha moment was that voting is inline with the Constitution than have a few black robed judges ruling that gay marriage is morally correct.
That Gingrich personally thinks about gay marriage, incest, bestiality, polygamy, or abortion is utterly irrelevant to whether or not a “right way” can be found to legitimize evil that has Hollywood applauding, and is rotting the foundations of our society.
It is relevant on how he answered the question in the liberal media that dominates the news. As the "right way" is for self-determination of the citizens of the state. Go place your blame on the liberals who infect Washington state and not Newt.
Well he has wrapped up a very small segment of the conservative base. He had momentum going into the debate, but his performance was disappointing to say the least. But he will retain that small base and try to capture more support in the primaries. The general, forget it, he will then become proud of his affiliation with Spector and also his liberal voting record. Just watch.
Gingrich states explicitly that he is not for gay marriage. Your your point in this whole exchange has been to suggest that his language "right way" implies that he is. So, yes, that is what we're talking about.
Further, you can not claim to be "just the messenger" when you're intention is clearly to MISREPRESENT his position on the topic
Basic right and wrong cannot be determined by democratic means. Not legitimately.
I think so too. Usually around 11 PM est., they begin hit pieces against Newt. They are working it like an operative. They sure have a lot of anger towards Mr. Newt.
Here’s again the opening line in the Wall St. J article:
“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.”
Wouldn’t the proper thing to say is that the law needs to be repealed, or the law corrupts society at a time when the radical gay agenda is pushing and succeeding in elevating homosexuality in kindergarten, schools, colleges, and our armed forces? It may be a bit old fashioned but still a few of us believe that our rights come from God and evil in the form of sins against nature be it from gay marriage, to polygamy, to incest to abortion, can never be legitimated by anyone, not even by government. Go lookup what many of the Framers said, on how when we cease to be a moral nation we condemn our country to an unjust end. This is what is happening with Obamanation. There are times when regardless of our political favorites, we need to stand up and say you were wrong or at the very least that Gingrich badly misspoke. But so far, no one is standing up for the truth.
The evil of gay marriage can never be “legitimated” simply because of popular vote. Or else, we go down the slippery slope of saying that there is a “right way” of legitimizing incest, polygamy, incest, or abortion (as has occurred.)
We all stood up and applauded when Gingrich won S. Carolina including this individual. It was delightful. But that was then, this is now. When we join a “resistance” to defeat Romney, like in battle, sacrifices and alliances have to be made as the battle progresses. Romney has made his pact with Ron Paul. Unless all the polls are skewed, this now turning out to be a 2-man race, and the battle to defeat Romney is now joined, and so hard choices have to be made. Next Tuesday is crucial. Unless Santorum wins MI, Romney would again regain his momentum, and this time he just may be unstoppable.
And I did not say it was.
As, I said this to him following that statement, “Go place your blame on the liberals who infect Washington state and not Newt.”
Newt an Santorum haven’t wrapped up anything yet. This is not going to help.
Newt and Santorum both have troubles in the general election. So does Romney and Obama.
No need to run to the center at this point. Obama sure isn’t.
Read again:
Here’s again the opening line in the Wall St. J article:
“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.”
Gingrich pledges support for constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2851011/posts
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
This may be the only option conservatives have available.
I would also like to see an amendment specifically protecting real property rights of landowners.
Read it again yourself, doofus.
It is a reporter saying that. Do you like it when journalists put words in Santorum’s mouth?
Because reporters are always right when they suggest someone is suggesting something?
What part of him saying he would not vote for the law did you not understand?
The clearly SUGGESTED implication in Newt’s statement is that he believes BECAUSE the process was done the right way, the people will have the chance to vote against it through referendum.
Don’t put words in what I say.
No one is so idiotic to say that Gingrich is for gay marriage. But to think that there is ever a “right way” to legitimize an “intrinsic evil” as the Catholic Catechism calls it, is something quite different. So it is you you don’t seem to understand the contrast in these positions and one must wonder whether you act like the proverbial three monkeys.
Homosexuality has become acceptable, gay marriage is headed that way. There is nothing any president can do to change it, no one can change it except the voters, not even St. Rick and if that is what you are counting on, you are going to be disappointed. People work with gays, they go to school with gays, they are team members with gays, people have neighbors who are gay, they have friends and relatives who are gay, their hairdressers are gay, gays are on the front line, there are gay conservative politicians. Santorum may be gay....?ROFLMAO
THX 1138
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.