Posted on 11/21/2013 5:39:06 PM PST by ReformationFan
The meanstream media has been all atwitter this week over the spat between the Cheney sisters – Liz, a candidate for the U.S. Senate in Wyoming, and her lesbian sister Mary – regarding same-sex marriage. Actually, you can't even call this a spat, since only one of the two sisters is bickering with the other in this little family war.
And the one doing the sniping here is not the heterosexual, happily-married, Christian sister. The one who is lobbing the grenades here is her perpetually aggrieved, sexually-confused, gay-activist sibling.
I'm not sure what you call it when one sister is trying to pick a very public fight with the other, and the second sister won't fight back, but instead turns the other cheek, just as Jesus taught. I would call it intolerance and bigotry and a form of bullying.
In other words, Liz Cheney is not the intolerant bigot here. Mary Cheney is.
(Excerpt) Read more at renewamerica.com ...
Cynical as I am, I have to think to Mary is in on it.
What better way to endear Liz to conservatives than having her dyke sister slashing at her throat?
Cynical or realistic? All the recent coverage of the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination has made me nostalgic for the early 1960s. As flawed as things were back then(as there are flaws with every era and time period), at least both the dems and repubs alike got issues like life, marriage and the natural family right back then. Or at the very least, paid lipservice in support of these issues and wouldn’t even have thought of doing otherwise(it would’ve been death to their political careers if they had).
Well, we know what Jack Kennedy really thought about marriage, the difference is the media wouldn’t report it back then. I’m sure he loved his kids but used them as political props. It’s likely he had no respect for homosexuals though, no one did, and even today many liberals are faking their “acceptance” of faggotry.
The pro-homo advocacy was just getting started back then. Hell even 15 years ago the idea of gay marriage was unthinkable and the domain of the extreme left only, European nonsense. As late as 2004 we had John Kerry insisting he was against it and accusing Republicans who said he was of “smearing” him. Even Obama in 2008 couldn’t be for it. The queer propaganda machine and lack of effective response from the right has really taken a toll in short period of time.
It’s Romans 1:24-32 happening before our very eyes. Our society is going to be(and already is being) badly hurt by this. A nation cannot break God’s laws and expect to reap positive consequences(Obamacare is a good example of one of these consequences).
The question of which came first has to be boil down to when there are published accounts of either of the Cheney parents espousing that people who engage in homosexuality should be marrying and whether those accounts pre or post date the Cheney daughter’s behavioral choice.
According the Wikipedia article about the daughter, it was she who encouraged her father to support marriage by people engaging in homosexuality. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Cheney
That explicit reported information, if true, and it does seem quite plausible and likely, suggests to that he had a different point of view prior to his daughter’s influence - and that is my general point about these politicians who do an about face when it’s their kid who goes against the tenets of their families and the fabric of Judaeo-Christian society.
So is she planning on moving to Wyoming so that she won't vote for her sister? Because otherwise she can't vote for her anyway.
It’s hard to know what is in your mind with your tiny little obsession, there is no point to it.
Fifteen years of supporting gay marriage is sufficient, if you want to try and figure out if he had ever formed an internal political position on it before he learned that his daughter was a lesbian, you should do that, it is of no interest to me.
You can waste all of your time that you want, trying to read those meaningless tea leaves.
If a professional politician wanted to run a republican presidential campaign on promoting gay marriage, almost a decade and a half ago, then that man sounds like he was open to the idea once it first arose in America.
I explained my observation a few times because your replies showed that you were missing my point entirely. Your last post show that you still do get my point and that the observation bothers you deeply. I have either not been clear enough for you in three tries or you are just choosing to dismiss as not important for the governing class and society as a whole the pattern of parents who discard their own principles when their child says he’s homosexual.
I don’t think they are, leaders who have principles and beliefs that call them to run for office, who face tough, hostile, interrogative campaigns and who make difficult decisions and hold high offices, know what they believe in, they aren’t changing views because they finally know someone who is homosexual, they just never really cared in the first place.
They use the personal as an excuse, and as a cover story, to switch to a more libertarian/rino position that updates their image about an issue they never really cared about anyway.
As far as Dick Cheney, yeah, you were really beating that into the ground and taking that into extremes.
The topic is parents, including those in elected office, who change their stated views 180 degrees when its their own kid who announces he chooses to engage in homosexuality.
As far as your other comment about elected officials who never cared in the first place and don’t have homosexual children and then say they support gay marriage, I agree with you.
The real topic is an effort to create a lie, that the Cheney family is having an internal war over gay marriage, they aren’t, that is all political theater, some of the most dishonest campaigning we have seen, and the entire family is participating, which shows how disgusting dishonest they all are.
This is a dishonestly pro Liz Cheney (who supports gay marriage) article, which is geared to helping her win a Senate seat.
Gee whiz, fella/mame, my observation is not aimed at the Cheneys. Why do you keep talking only about the Cheneys? Also I did not say it was theater, political of otherwise. You are not at all understanding the subtlety of the psychological phenomenon I describe. I am not accusing anyone of consciously mouthing anything. Just the opposite, in fact. I made a general statement that covers what happens psychologically to a subset of all parents of people who have declared that they are engaging in homosexuality. Enough with the Cheneys. I like the Cheneys; I have nothing against the Cheneys. It’s a general phenomenon pushed hard and made the only “acceptable” parental face by the “progressive” milieu.
The thread is about the Cheneys and the Wyoming Senate race, and your claim of psychological phenomenon is inaccurate, as I already posted to you.
Give it a rest.
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.