Posted on 12/27/2009 8:58:55 PM PST by Steelfish
Gay Candidates Get Support That Causes May Not
By JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr. December 27, 2009
HOUSTON — When an openly gay woman won the mayor’s race here this month, it was the latest in a string of victories by gay candidates across the country, a trend that seems to contradict the bans on same-sex marriage that have been passed in most states in recent years.
Charles Pugh said his sexuality did not play a role in his race for Detroit’s City Council. Lupe Valdez won a bitter race in Texas in 2004, a year before the state banned same-sex marriage. Take Texas, by many measures one of the most conservative states in the nation. In 2005, it became the 19th state to enact constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage; the voters passed the referendum by a ratio of three to one.
Yet in the last decade, an openly gay woman has twice won election as the sheriff in Dallas County, and another openly gay woman was elected district attorney in Travis County, which includes the city of Austin. Gay candidates have also won city council seats in Austin, Fort Worth and Houston.
Then, this month, Annise Parker, the city controller who is a lesbian, swept to a solid victory in the mayoral race in Houston, the nation’s fourth largest city.
There are currently at least 445 openly gay and lesbian people holding elected office in the United States, up from 257 eight years ago, according to the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund, a political group that supports gay candidates.
And while Ms. Parker’s victory in Houston, a city of 2.2 million people, was the biggest victory for gay rights advocates this year, gay candidates made strides in other places in the last election cycle
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I respect her choice to be gay, but I don’t want her to push it onto my children!
I respect her choice to be gay, but I don’t want her to push it onto my children!
“Homosexuals cannot procreate, they can only recruit.” It’s what they do best.
And why does this liberal news reporter assume that there is a contradiction between electing gay candidates to office and banning homosexuxal marriage? I think that thinking reflects a liberal thought process that, if one accepts homosexuality or homosexuals in some areas of life, that one must swallow the entire gay agenda.
I would say that the liberals are the ones whose thought process is out of order. They are the ones who assume that one is bigoted or hypocritical if one is accepting of gays in elective office but not homosexual marriage. In fact, these are two separate distinct issues.
Homosexuality is about what a person does, not what he is.
“And why does this liberal news reporter assume...”
Apply this thinking to any other area of life...
Throw out the operator’s manual for your car, computer, food processor. Black out the instructions on drugs, cleaning solutions....You name it, and then get back to me with the consequences and ask “why? why?”
We call God a liar. We try to remake God in our image, and expect Him to do our bidding. We throw out His absolute truth, His absolute standard, the Bible, and when everything falls into chaos we ask, “why? why?”
Is there a good substitute for the the Ten Commandments?
There’s a lot of silly, crazy stuff going on in the name of religeon that’s embarrassing, and insulting to God and any earnest person, but none of that changes the faithful, unchanging, true God found in His Word. He says, “If you seek Me, you will find Me, if you seek Me with all your heart.” The rest is gravy.
I have zero respect for her choice to be gay.
Yeah, and I respect letting a fox guard a hen house.
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.