Posted on 03/03/2013 8:10:25 PM PST by SeekAndFind
He's one of the few big-time celebrities who is also a big-time Republican.
But Clint Eastwood has veered from the viewpoint of many Conservatives in one regard: the actor signed the American Foundation for Equal Rights’s “Friend of the Court” brief this week.
In doing so, the actor became one of over 100 prominent Republicans to support this gay rights organization's document, which it has filed with the Supreme Court.
n April, the highest court in the land will listen to arguments about the legality of California’s Proposition 8, an amendment that passed in 2008 and which declares “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized" in that state.
Those such as Eastwood have affixed their name to this brief in the hope that this gay marriage ban will be overturned.
And recent poll revealed that 61 percent of CA residents would support marriage equality.
Hat tip to you brother Maurice.
..... Guess those rumors of an appearance by Clint at CPAC were a little premature and definitely won't be happening now LOL.
There were bigger reasons than that.
Libertarianism is about supporting the left in the causes that are actually happening, that can win and that have been winning for 50 years in America.
Causes that will result in more liberal voters and the end of conservative economic hopes and goals.
Exactly. Who knows what the heck is going on in a six-year-old’s mind? Our twins are about to turn six and their little bitty twisty minds are a constant mystery to me. Just tonight, one son came running in the room all upset and yelled, “Mama Mama! Dada has bullets and he’s going to shoot William! [our newest cat] Dada hates our cats!”
I swear my eyes crossed. WTF? I went and asked my husband. It turned out Crazy Six Year Old Son had found a little tin of mine and asked what was in it. My husband was joking and said, “Bullets!” (It actually contains safety pins.) On the strength of THAT, he came running in with his big pronouncement on cats and the imaginary bullets.
And idiot parents are going to let their six-year-olds decide whether they’re boys or girls? I can only repeat, WTF??????
The LDS bowed to the state when it came to their wackadoo teaching on polygamy. That’s on them. But there are many faiths that will never buy into whatever impossibility the state puts forth as its ever-evolving take on marriage. Just like Baptists won’t stop baptizing or Catholics won’t stop private confession, no matter what the state happens to think of the practices at any one time.
And I don’t care who says it, foreigner or not, the state doesn’t define marriage. Anywhere. Sometimes the definition it used coincided with the real definition, sometimes it doesn’t. For some faiths, the state’s definition hasn’t been legit for a long time. It’s just that ‘gay marriage’ is being framed as some sort of civil right, and civil divorce and remarriage hasn’t. Yet.
Freegards
Exactly.
How much control over marriage did the Pope have during centuries of history?
Did he make the law for everyone? What was the law for non-Catholics?
Your preference for letting Islam define marriage, or to let the church of the gay blades decide marriage, isn’t very appealing.
Either way we get not only gay marriage and polygamy, but everything that every weirdo and atheist can come up with.
LOL!!!
All you can do is reassure them, and tel them that Pop is a great fellow, He is your Dad! You don’t entertain notions that Dad is going to shoot the cats LOL
It is beyond ridiculous.
His position on this or any single issue is just not enough to bring me to denounce him or any good man or woman.. I haven’t had a sinless season in my lifetime, so I just can’t throw any balls in this game.. :)
Baptists confess in public.
Three words: “Paint Your Wagon.” Hard to believe Lee Marvin was in it.
“How much control over marriage did the Pope have during centuries of history?”
None, Popes don’t have any ability to change the definition of marriage.
“Your preference for letting Islam define marriage, or to let the church of the gay blades decide marriage, isn’t very appealing.”
Another’s faith or the state doen’t define marriage for me. I doubt if it does for you either.
“Either way we get not only gay marriage and polygamy, but everything that every weirdo and atheist can come up with.”
If the state defines marriage, we get to be punished for not agreeing with whatever judges, pols, or the voting majority decides to call marriage at the time. Because that is how the state decides what a marriage is, it has no other way to do it. My faith isn’t going to accept polygamy or ‘gay marriage’, no matter who else accepts it. I doubt yours will either.
Freegards
I guess the state wouldn’t have a problem with them like they would Catholics, then. I doubt Baptists would stop if the state decided they should, in any case.
Freegards
Naw they would never relinquish.
FReepgards
Your post didn’t say anything, according to you the Pope was always tolerant of whatever people wanted to do with marriage, he never imposed any rules on anyone, Kings and peasant both could practice polygamy and gay marriage.
As far as there not being any definition of marriage, just whatever people want to make up, then what about the military and benefits to married people, and divorce and child custody , states recognizing marriages etc.
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.