[OHelix]

"Folks, that was the byline in the Wall St.J. Stop blaming the messenger?"

No sir! Your own editorial addition to the title indicates your intent: "[Right Way To Legalize Incest Too?]"

It is clearly your intent to misrepresent Gingrich's statement by implying FALSELY, that he is for gay marriage.

He states explicitly in the article itself, that he is not.

You clearly had the EXACT same intent to deceive as the author of the original headline.

[Steelfish]

We are not talking about what Gingrich thinks on gay marriage, bestiality, polygamy, abortion, incest, or polyamorous relations.

As the article begins “in a break with Santorum and Romney...” he now thinks there is a “right way” to legalize this rot. Those of us who still believe that our rights fro our Creator reject this.

So stop the spin, stop trying to accuse the bearer of the news, and if you have any complaints write to the authors of the article. But stop hurling invective and false accusations. Either that, or have the courage and integrity to speak up and admit that Gingrich misspoke or he was wrong, absolutely wrong, in this muddled0-headed way of trying to validate an evil.

[American Constitutionalist]

Isn't that the very intent of those who a few weeks ago bashed Rick Santorum and were trying to paint Rick Santorum as being against the Tea Party in that video by taking his words out of context ?
So ? if Newt says that there is a " Right Way " to legalize Gay Marriage ? what does it mean then ?
Yes, many are in favor in sending to vote on a referendum to each state the issue of Gay Marriage... however ? if a state were to legalize it the " Right Way " , so Morally, even though he's against it, if a state were to legalize it the " Right Way " Newt has no problem with it ?