Skip to comments.Gingrich: Conservatives Will Have to Accept Marriage 'Equality'
Posted on 12/20/2012 3:05:19 PM PST by KazanEdited on 12/20/2012 7:08:12 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Newt Gingrich said that conservatives will have to accept marriage equality after three more states this year voted to allow same sex marriage and more will likely do the same in the 2014 election.
The former Speaker of the House said he didn
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Thank you for your support and thank you for your comments on marriage and the many and difficult efforts needed to make it work. You understand.
“It looks like the Newt critics here several months ago were right about him. In the end, he is a RINO and not much different than Mitt Romney.”
EXACTLY RIGHT. I could never get comfortable with him. It shows that after Perry went AWOL for whatever reason we were really left with no great choices.
But John Does desire to marry Joe Sixpack is an impossibility because marriage already has a definition and John/Joe aint it.
I can call a giraffe a dog but that wont make it bark.”
WELL SAID. And do NOT teach my grandchildren that this is normal because it is NOT normal for a man/man or woman/woman to be married. What marriage next?
You are absolutely welcome. I realized I missed something important in my comments shortly after I walked away from my keyboard though...
Though I think it was tacitly implied in my previous post; one needs to be able to accept their partner’s ability to share their innermost thoughts and feelings and foster the environment of reciprocation.
‘nuff said :)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and yours!
And each affiliation/party has an extreme portion which has played a role into allowing people to do many if not all things they want to do. Some in that party want no regulations/ no restrictions on a lot issues tied to morality. I don't think many would consider giving a blanket statement for each individual of a group. Imo.
Why? Why do I HAVE to accept homosexual marraige?
Why aern’t Liberals ever called upon to “accept” anything, such as my 2nd Amendment right?
And each affiliation/party has an extreme portion which has played a role into allowing people to do many if not all things they want to do. Some in that party want no regulations/ no restrictions on a lot issues tied to morality.
Nor should they, so long as nobody's rights are being violated.
I don't think many would consider giving a blanket statement for each individual of a group. Imo.
I'm afraid I don't know what you're saying here.
That’s exactly correct. Homosexuals are already subject to the same regulations as heterosexuals. I can understand their cry for acceptance, but even marriage does not make them equal. When and only when a gay couple can produce children ON THEIR OWN, will they be equal.
I’m all for giving them all the legal rights straight couples get with marriage, except where adoption is concerned. Legalizing s/s marriage will set the stage for courts to set adoption quotas to ensure that same sex couples have equal access to orphaned children without reguard to what’s best for the child.
Thanks for posting that, manc...I have some friends I want to send it to.
The South is the last holdout against the sodomite marriage plague, but the way things are going, I wonder how long it will take for us to fall, too.
AMEN to that
Many Newt supporters in the recent primary knew that. However, given a choice of the phenomenally weak Massachusetts liberal describing himself as "severely conservative" (the only person alive who would use those words about himself; I'm "responsibly conservative", for example), or a known sleaze who could at least be trusted to act conservative most of the time, many of us were willing to settle for Newt. Palin, DeMint, Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Santorum, and many others ranked above Newt, but as those candidates dropped out or failed to announce, we tried to find any possible option. As happens in at least two-thirds of elections, the GOP leadership won the primaries, and America lost, we couldn't even get Newt as the nominee, not when it was Romney's turn.
you kinow you and my wife would really have a lot to talk about, in a good way I mean.
if we don;t get our party speaking up for what is raight on social issues and rotect the kids and family then the left would finally destroy this country for good.
I looked at every rule of that 1963 rules and it;s stunning to see how much they have passed and yet our cowards the GOP simply cannot grasp what the left really wants or they do not care because they care about their own power and wealth
haha. so true!
what is wrong with this country? In the past 50 years, America has lost its morality. First, it was prayer in school, in the 60’s. Then it was abortion, now it’s about homosexuality. what’s next? euthanasia? what’s the next issue that people are going to say “well that’s the religious person’s perspective, that’s not a valid political idea” Wake up idiots! God was integral to the founding of America. In fact, the fact that we won the American Revolution was itself a miracle. The farther down this path we go, the worse our economy and our security will get, Guaranteed.
Which one is Newt’s sister?
There are no decent politicians any more.
I will never trust another one.
BRILLIANT, your ability to elucidate your opinion is beyond amazing....pathetic
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.