Posted on 04/07/2014 11:28:45 AM PDT by Nachum
At the Saddleback Civil Forum, Barack Obama addressed his definition of marriage.
While he said he believes that marriage is a union between a man and a woman, he also said that he would not support a Constitutional definition of marriage as so.
His argument is that marriage has not been defined by the federal government, traditionally. He said that it is up to the states to decide
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
Why are you obsessed with politics?
You spend your days here telling conservatives to drop out of politics (at least as conservative), to stop fighting gay marriage and drugs, and then you promote that they vote libertarian.
You do all this promoting of liberalism and fighting for the status quo of current law supporting gay marriage, while proclaiming GOD!!!, GOD!!
No, he's not. Obama had his finger in the wind, and the wind was blowing in favor of Prop 8. Hence, his comments on marriage and God.
But there was his base to keep in line. Thus, his libertarian-seeming opposition to codifying traditional marriage in the state constitution, which is what Prop 8 attempted to do. He was clearly trying to have it both ways: Give the Christians a warm feeling about him while reassuring the base.
A month or two before his Rick Warren encounter, Obama had written in a letter to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Club:
As the Democratic nominee for President, I am proud to join with and support the LGBT community in an effort to set our nation on a course that recognizes LGBT Americans with full equality under the law. That is why I support extending fully equa! rights and benefits to same-sex couples under both state and federal law. That is why I support repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy, and the passage of laws to protect LGBT Americans from hate crimcs and employment discrimination. And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states.
His support for traditional marriage has since "evolved" as he has "grown in office". Of course, what really happened was that the political winds shifted during his first term, such that he felt comfortable going fully with his true feelings for 2012.
Yes, Obama is libertarian on some issues, social liberalism, foreign affairs, national defense, the border, abortion, gays, etc.
Rand Paul:
"Preaching to the choir is not working for the conservative movement. We are growing stale and moss-covered. We must evolve, adapt or die."
"I think that the Republican Party, in order to get bigger, will have to agree to disagree on social issues,"
"The Republican Party is not going to give up on having quite a few people who do believe in traditional marriage. But the Republican Party also has to find a place for young people and others who don’t want to be festooned by those issues."
Al Gore used a similar "let the states decide it" argument when he asked his position in euthanasia in the 2000 election. It's a standard politician's response when they're running for federal office and don't want to lose voters by taking a stand on a hot button issue.
Of course many freepers ignore that and claim Democrats and leftists would NEVER argue their "send it back to the states" applause line or EVER try to use state governments to thwart federal policies. Silly me, I could have sworn during the Bush era a bunch of leftist state governments ROUTINELY thumbed their nose at the Bush administration and enacted whatever they wanted, regardless of what federal law said about it.
States can’t prevent gay marriage in the military, federal employment, and in immigration.
We also know what libertarians support, and they support that left-wing social agenda at all levels of government, and in all politics, it is their philosophical reason for opposing conservatism.
A good way to piss of a libtard royally is to get into a discussion of Brendan Eich and Mozilla and then play that video of Obama with Rick Warren. Then, to scratch the itchy scab, shake a stick at the Prop 8 exit polling, which had seventy percent of Obama's strongest support group voting in favor. Why, those fascists!
Now, in the United States, a homosexual cannot be fired because of his sexual orientation. But it is moral and right that a heterosexual can.
What does that even mean?
That is among the silliest most bizarre pro-gay marriage arguments that I have seen.
How is that a response to what I posted to you in post 18?
“”If you don’t support gay marriage, then reverse your position, support a conservative party platform, conservative candidates, and conservative politics, to protect marriage and reverse the federal legalization of gay marriage in the military, federal employment, and immigration.
Support politics and law that protects marriage at all levels of government, from city politics, to County, to state, to federal politics.””
You think by keeping up your monotonous lie you make it any truer?
Why don’t you support this?
Reverse your position, support a conservative party platform, conservative candidates, and conservative politics, to protect marriage and reverse the federal legalization of gay marriage in the military, federal employment, and immigration.
Support politics and law that protects marriage at all levels of government, from city politics, to County, to state, to federal politics.
Anyone who has to keep on lying has no truth in him. That’s why I won’t bow to your idea of trying to plaster anti-this, anti-that laws all over the place.
So you fight to keep abortion laws as they are, and mock the pro-life movement’s legal victories, and you fight to keep gay marriage the law for the federal government, and mock those of us who want to change your gay marriage laws.
The most important of all, you promote those politics not at DU, but here, at FR.
Being a good libertarian, you have the laws you want, and don’t want them reversed now that they are in place.
Why don’t YOU support spirituality that makes such politics and law superfluous? I’ve not even seen a PEEP from you about the Lord other than as a guise for your political jihad.
It is you who need to repent in the matter; not I.
I seek to build foundations while you flounder around on quicksand and mock those who build foundations.
Let’s see who does better at the final judgment.
I do support Christianity and Christian politics, that is what we are arguing about, you support Satan’s politics.
Using the Lord’s name is your cover for your anti-God politics and political activism at FR.
You even mock we Christians and conservatives for our pro-life, pro-marriage efforts.
You oppose us politically.
You support Christianity?
To all observation that’s a laugh!
You could put every “pro-Christian” law on the books and STILL be among the goats.
Actual, true spirituality is why I heed the Lord’s warning not to “heal the wound of my people lightly.”
These are the Lord’s people.
No amount of law will heal them.
You go about parroting the word Christianity and you look to be light years from Christ.
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.
