Posted on 12/23/2015 6:16:38 PM PST by Helicondelta
That’s a very important factor, and is something a non-homosexual Justice Department could address.
They all have to answer to donors. Huckabee too. It’s why he’s mixing religion with state, here. Whoever gets in needs to fix the invasion problem, then address the 21trillion debt, then remove the restraints against judeochristian belief on the citizens. Get people to talk about what’s wrong with same sex marriage. But the judges have ruled on it for now. The president cannot do anything about that
There is no place in this race for debating cultural matters. If we don’t get someone in there who is not owned by corporate donors, homosexual unions will sink way further from the least of our governments worries
I consider myself a pretty strict social conservative. For me abortion is issue number one, and I’m a practicing Catholic. I’m one of those “no exceptions” pro-life guys. That said gay marriage isn’t one of my top three issues. Heck thanks to the damage Obama’s done to this country in the last few years I don’t know if it would even make a top ten list.
Marriage is an important issue. But top 3 when we’re at war or when our economy is in rough shape or when our borders are like sieves? Sorry I don’t think so. If it is one of Huckabee’s top issues then I question his judgement.
The gay Marriage thing is very important because it’s an existential issue for western civ once you consider the implications.
But Huckster is a raging idiot if he thinks Cruz is somehow slacking on the subject. Of course Huck is a raging idiot to begin with. All this is, is the GOPe flailing wildly in search of a magic bullet and it’s obvious to anyone caring to look.
Their lesser evil mantra is losing more adherents by the day. They have relied on the Dem tactics for controlling the plantation, it never occurred to them the slaves might someday revolt.
you always post such deep, well thought out, reasoned and logical posts.....how you are not a national commentator or writer just miffs me.....LOLOLOL
BTW, Trump and Huckabee? That's an oddball marriage.
she is proving to be the lowest information poster on FR of all time .
this is BFAC’s only brain wave: “na na na na na na....”
what a genius she is....HAH...
No kidding.
...well, methinks the check has been sent....after all, this could come right out of "Art of the Deal" -
The Left succeeded by framing the debate as a civil rights issue.
But it s really about the right of children to be raised by their natural parents and, barring that, an adoptive husband and wife.
Imagine, if you can, your children being orphaned and given to two homosexuals to raise. Fortunately, I can t bring myself to imagine it.
When the Supreme Court struck down anti-sodomy laws they really started something.
Put the coffee cup down first, though.
This is a woman who on FR admitted liking Bill Clinton and screamed scripture to back it.
....wow, what a steel trap mind....sheesh.
...HAH....had not seen that...thanks.
Ask her. DEFENDED HIM. Went on for hours. She got called on it by a lot of people. Same thing. Random scripture in her defense is all we heard.
And people wonder why conservatism is a mess.
Frankly, I’ve yet to see a single post from her with any thought behind it at all. It’s all just mind numbed cheerleading...no logic, no reason...vapid....vacant....but at least she’s insulting as hell.
Thats been my experience also. To the letter.
Ditto.
The Democrat strategy since 2004+1 (day after losing November2004) has been to win the religious issues. That doesn’t mean swaying all religious voters to vote for democrats, much of the time they just persuade them to stay home because of Republican ‘corruption’ (two outed faggots in 2006 cost Congress, in Louisiana sex matters again).
Meanwhile opposition to Hillary’s hardcore homo agenda is not worth discussing in polite media.
People might not like Huckabee but only Huckabee and Santorum will flat out say the decision was wrong and if elected will work to get it overturned. The rest, including Trump and Cruz will tap dance around it and say it’s a states rights issue. In other words in their minds if a liberal state votes for queer “marriage” then queer “marriage” is OK. That’s BS and they all know it but they don’t have the nerve to express their real feelings on the matter for fear of being labeled a homophobe. There needs to be a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman and end this nonsense once and for all.
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.