Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ExCTCitizen; Responsibility2nd; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; narses; TheOldLady; xzins; ...
What I'm saying is that if a candidate who agrees with me on the major issues, the border, gun rights, state's rights, jobs taxes and he is pro gay marriage and he is running against a person who is for amnesty, gun control, big government and higher taxes yet he is against gay marriage, I will support the candidate who agrees with me on major issues.

So, you don't think the sanctity of marriage is a major issue?

No matter how bad it gets, we can always close the border.

If 2nd Amendment rights are violated, they can be restored.

"States rights" don't even exist. PEOPLE have rights, states have enumerated powers, there IS a difference. However, as I demonstrated earlier, marriage IS a federal issue due to the the Full Faith and Credit Clause and the 14th Amendment.

Taxes have always gone up and down, as has employment, to think that anything done on these is ever permanent is naive.

Marriage, on the other hand, is something that CANNOT be undone in any reasonable manner once it's changed. Once the genie is out of the bottle it will be almost impossible to put back in.

So, it seems that you consider issues that are largely cyclical to be major, but you consider the destruction of a 6000 year old institution to be unimportant.

That said, I think it shouldn't be call marriage. It should be civil unions..not marriage.

Legal unions between individuals have ALWAYS existed; they are referred to, among other things, as partnerships and corporations.

I agree with you on marriage. Marriage is between a male and female.

This sounds like the pro-same-sex "marriage" version of, "I'm personally opposed, but..."

103 posted on 07/30/2014 12:50:18 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]


To: wagglebee
That said, I think it shouldn't be call marriage. It should be civil unions..not marriage.

Civil Unions? Sheesh, we lost that battle years ago. And because the libs were willing to cave on that issue - the queers pushed their agenda further. Now we fight Civil Marriages. And because the libertarians are caving there also, we now see evern more perversions on the horizon.

106 posted on 07/30/2014 1:11:02 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Read my last reply. I know people hate my views on this. It is a view my parents gave me, not to judge anyone.


159 posted on 08/03/2014 8:27:27 AM PDT by ExCTCitizen (I'm ExCTCitizen and I approve this reply. If it does offend Libs, I'm NOT sorry...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson