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

To: logician2u

Would you know how many votes the Green Party candidate recieved?


10 posted on 12/26/2004 6:52:46 PM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: Ben Ficklin
Would you know how many votes the Green Party candidate recieved?

Don't know offhand. Knowing the liberal, enviro-conscious tendencies of the Pacific Northwest it would not surprise me if the Greens got more votes than the Libertarians this time around.

However, Muth is not offering free advice for Democrats on how to reclaim their "lost" votes. If they want to split the Greens off permanently, that's fine with him -- and with me, for that matter. Better to isolate them than to have one party (or both, as things are now headed) accept the Earth religion as gospel.

14 posted on 12/26/2004 7:08:06 PM PST by logician2u
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Ben Ficklin; logician2u
Would you know how many votes the Green Party candidate recieved?

According to the Washington Secretary of State, there were only three candidates on the ballot, and the LP candidate got 63,346 votes, 2.2576%.

Her Community Involvement:
Member of the Center for Spiritual Living and usher team leader; member/contributor to many lesbian gay bisexual and transgender (LGBT) organizations, including the LGBT Community Center, Lesbian Resource Center and Lifelong AIDS Alliance; volunteer at Columbia City Cinema.
Her position on marriage:
Right now, our country has about 1000 laws which give special rights to different-sex couples that are prohibited to same-sex couples. This is wrong.

I know that many voters are uncomfortable with the idea of homosexuals living together in loving families. But comfortable or not, it is happening, and these families deserve the same rights and protections as any other families. Just because such families don't fit in with your religious belief or world view doesn't mean that the government should be giving special rights to one segment of our society and prohibiting it to another.

I fully support the right of any religious organization to define "Holy Matrimony" in any manner it chooses. However, our government does not have the same right to discriminate. Our nation's founders fought hard to establish a clear separation of church and state because they recognized how important that separation is to the cause of liberty. In this free country of ours, when a religious group - or even a majority of people - seek to impose their religious beliefs or world view on others, we must not allow it - to do otherwise is simply wrong.

The term "civil" refers to things done by a government or non-religious entity. Therefore, I support "civil unions" for everyone. If marriage is a good thing, why would anyone want to limit letting others participate? Marriage has been an evolving institution throughout history. Allowing same-sex partners to marry is just another little step in that evolution.

35 posted on 12/26/2004 7:57:25 PM PST by Mike Fieschko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | 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