Posted on 12/11/2012 9:48:27 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Conservative firebrand Glenn Beck has joined a growing chorus of Republican commentators in defending gay marriage, laying out a strong case for ending government opposition to letting same-sex couples wed.
"Let me take the pro-gay marriage people and the religious people — I believe that there is a connecting dot there that nobody is looking at, and that's the Constitution," Beck said during a recent segment of his online talk show. "The question is not whether gay people should be married or not. The question is why is the government involved in our marriage?"
While Beck's defense of gay marriage may seem surprising, given his far-right political views and audience, it is actually not new. Earlier this year, Beck said that he has the "same opinion on gay marriage as President Barack Obama" and does not see same-sex unions as a "threat to America."
Still, Beck's public renewal of his support for gay marriage comes at a politically significant moment for the GOP, which is working to reshape its message to appeal to a changing electorate. A Gallup survey released last week found that 53 percent of Americans are in favor of legalizing gay marriage, a number that has been steadily growing for the past decade.
Moreover, by couching his support for gay marriage in a libertarian framework, Beck makes the case for the right to look past differences on social issues in order to broaden their coalition to include all limited government conservatives.
"What we need to do, I think, as people who believe in the Constitution, is to start looking for allies who believe in the Constitution and expand our own horizon," Beck said. "We would have the ultimate big tent."
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Didn’t the Victorian era abuse their kids as well? The new era of hedonism and absent parentage will have consequences. Just do it. And pile debt on their shoulders. No really, they won’t resent the world you’ve shrugged off on them.
Maybe some happy drugs would help.
I concur with Beck on this one. There is real common ground with many libertarians on these issues. Get the Gov’t out of many social issues: gay marriage, reproduction, drugs. The Constitution does not address these issues, so leave them to the States or individuals.
I think you’re right. I’m no Beck apologist, but I think he’s just trying to change the subject to issues he thinks are more important.
In other words there is no such thing as marriage, because it means anything an endless variety of people and cults and jokesters want to say it means, which could get quite imaginative as the years go by, after you get your changes passed ending marriage laws.
This certainly helps the leftists win. But hedonism is at the root of these accepted beliefs and practices. I suppose then that all leftists are either hedonists or they turn a blind eye to it in the name of tolerance. Either way, doesn't matter much, more than 50% have drunk the coolaid and there's no turning back. This is why the leftists are winning and will win (but really lose). I'm not being pessimistic...just realistic.
But what if the business you open is a hotel, and two newly wed homosexuals come to rent the honeymoon suite, you deny them, and they sue you?
Or a photography or catering business, and you refusing to offer your services to the gay...and they sue you?
What we did when we created central government in this country at its start was create the vehicle of our own destruction.
It was just a matter of time, and a short one at that.
Nice going Ace...
I view it more as the weakness of "going along to get along," together with embracing the "harmless" force that is driving the deterioration of civilized and moral behavior.
What's next? Embracing Flash Mobs and the random murder of whites?
Your desire is to make the republicans more liberal.
Pretty simple really.
If you can tell me which part of the Constitution gave the fed govt powers to regulate marriage, I'll send you $1000. Was that in the 10th ammendment or under the powers to regulate interstate commerce?
It's just that I actually support the constitution while you people pretend to and then use it the same way liberals do. How on Earth are you affected if two fags down the street choose to call each other spouse? You're no conservative.
You are confusing as all get out.
You want to save the definition of marriage, by throwing out any and all definitions of marriage, and just letting everyone define it as they wish?
I'm talking about God and truth, neither of which necessarily have anything with whatever someone wants to call "religion".
I concur with Beck on this one. There is real common ground with many libertarians on these issues. Get the Gov’t out of many social issues: gay marriage, reproduction, drugs. The Constitution does not address these issues, so leave them to the States or individuals.
Then they follow a group of people who have man made beliefs and don't follow God. It's their choice to chose depravity but....
1 Corinthians 6:9,10 "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God".
Plus, that horrid phrase, “expand our own horizon.” Yeah, by embracing perversion? Beck has really, really jumped the shark here. He can side with the deviants all he wants, but I’m dropped him like a rock. Don’t have any interest in anything he has to say from here on out.
Their church can say that they are now trees.
Doesn't make them trees.
Your desire must be to demonstrate your blithering ignorance, and your lack of reading comprehension, and on that you succeeded. I never said any such thing. I simply think Glenn is trying to thread a needle and change the subject, not condoning gay marriage - but I also agree that doing so is probably impossible - which are the two points made by the poster I replied to.
But now I also agree that you are a phariseeical jerk.
he/s not even republican so who the hell does he think he is to tell us to change our party, he;s a liberal on social issues and wants taxes reduced
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.