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

To: e-gadfly

Complete Bull Crap. For now.

I have no doubt the Repugs MIGHT one day have a serious contender for the top slot who is pro-faggy.

But not in 2016.


2 posted on 10/21/2014 8:14:24 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Responsibility2nd

We could ask if any of this matters. IN that, the courts have decided to shove this down our throats.

The reason we have 30+ states allowing homosexual marriage is because, in the vast majority of those states, it was imposed by courts.

Admittedly a few passed homosexual marriage through the legislative process, but most did not.

So I question what it matters, since the Supreme Court will rule someday that there is a constitutional right to homosexual marriage. What any of us think, or what any of us have done to work to define marriage legislatively, will be overturned.


7 posted on 10/21/2014 8:22:07 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego (s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Responsibility2nd

I dunno. Before the nomination I agree with you. But after the nomination I would be shocked if it wasn’t some “”that’s just not an important issue” candidate.

Sad but true.


15 posted on 10/21/2014 8:32:06 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Responsibility2nd

I’m sorry but the GOP needs to let go of these states rights issues and deal with what is important to the average American household which is jobs, healthcare, taxes, personal freedom and the reduction of the size and scope of government.

The GOP platform should be strongly in favor of putting states rights back where they should be which is gay marriage, abortion and education as well as land conservation and pollution control.

If you are opposed to gay marriage (I am) and abortion (I am) then move to a state where they are not allowed. That’s the way it needs to be. The Constitution never intended the federal government to control these kinds of things.


25 posted on 10/21/2014 8:37:39 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose o f a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Responsibility2nd

*


96 posted on 10/21/2014 11:20:50 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (Liberalism to Fabianism to Socialism to Marxism to Totalitarianism.. "the inertia of stupidity" d8-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Responsibility2nd
"Complete Bull Crap. For now."

My personal experience, not validate anywhere except my small circle, is that there are some people who are advocates, some people who are adamant detractors...but the vast majority just don't giva sh!t.

But when you apply the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to the subject, the detractors are the majority.

Folks don't cotton to be compelled to offer services to homos if they have religious reasons to avoid it. Nor are they willing to compel others.

108 posted on 10/21/2014 12:04:42 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | 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