Posted on 11/05/2014 9:58:55 AM PST by Yashcheritsiy
To begin with, this election was, generally speaking, a rejection of the notion being advanced by many in the establishment wing of the Party that the Republicans needs to move to the Left on social issues like abortion and gay “marriage.” Earlier this year, GOP establishment leaders like Kevin McCarthy and Paul Ryan announced their plan to begin trying to recruit “Young Gun” candidates – socially liberal, and often homosexual, candidates to run under the Republican banner in an effort to “broaden the appeal” of the Party, especially to younger, socially liberal voters. John Boehner backed this effort, throwing money at the candidates who had been recruited to run this year. However, the voters who were supposed to be impressed by the GOP’s lurch to the Left on “individual choice” issues instead reacted with a collective yawn. In the race for the open seat in Massachusetts’ 6th congressional district, “Young Gun” Richard Tisei - a gay Republican who has a 100% rating from NARAL and Planned Parenthood, who (obviously) supports gay “marriage,” and who is “married” to his “partner” - lost by 15 points to a non-incumbent and relatively unknown Democrat. To give this some perspective, Tisei had ran for the same seat in 2012 against a well-known and long-time incumbent and lost by only a single point. It does not appear that Tisei’s choice to flaunt his peculiar lifestyle choice did him or the GOP any favors this time around...
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
Great, now I had a song stuck in my head.
“Stone the crow” being part of the lyrics.
*groan*
Wow.
Oops! Hat tip to you as well. Sorry I posted the zot before reading your post.
I have seen posts in which the poster reveals such things as “I am an atheist, but I think they aren’t very friendly.” Honestly, though, atheism is not compatible with conservatism.
Arizona revealed (yesterday?) that she is a lesbian. I forget the exact words, but it boiled down to ‘I’m a lesbian but I am conservative and believe in low taxes, guns, etc.’
The problem with such a position is that it normalizes acceptance and approval of the behavior if allowed to slide. Arizona revealed some kind of partner (did she say she is married?) and that the relationship has children involved.
The eventual message: “Oh, she’s our resident lesbian with SigOther and Kids. Don’t mind her she’s a conservative.”
The problem with that is we contend that conservatism is about preserving esteemed processes and values from the past. We want to preserve natural marriage, we want to preserve healthy relationships. Therefore, a TOTAL conservative cannot advocate homosexuality.
And, even if ‘accepted in silence’ that accepted presence is itself an advocacy of that which we believe is detrimental to treasured vital values about a wholesome culture.
Yeah.
Spot on xzins!
Is this available for the Undead Thread??? PLEASE???
************************
I couldn't agree more. Well said, xzins.
It’s still alive...
BO was also an outspoken Sarah Palin detractor.
Thanks for the ping.
Not of the eternal fate of others, but certainly of their behavior in our midst:
John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
1 Cor 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Ephesians 5:11 - And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove [them].
Colossians 3:5 - Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry...
Colossians 2:8 - Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
We should try to keep a distinction between Caesar’s world and the kingdom of God. The latter will enforce higher standards than the former, and should be expected to.
Nonetheless, it is a shock to see the US lose so many virtues that had been formerly pumped into it by its gospel roots.
My answer to such questions is to keep urging the gospel to individual souls. The “GOP” can’t go to hell or heaven. You or I can.
It seems self evident to me that we can disagree without being disagreeable. The poster in question stated:
Being a lesbian I feel compelled to set people like Paul Ryan straight. Liberals are liberals first and homosexuals 2nd. They will vote for an rich old white male democrat before they will vote for a young poor black lesbian. I vote for my liberty 1st, both economic and individual. My worldview extends way beyond my genitals. Gay marriage is not on my radar as an issue except to oppose it. MARRIAGE IS A RITE NOT A RIGHT. IT IS A COVENANT NOT A CONTRACT. If your sole purpose is to get my vote based on my bed you are useless and YOU INSULT ME BY ASSUMING THAT WHEN I VOTE ALL I CARE ABOUT IS MY SEX ORGANS.
I WILL NOT BE PANDERED TO AS A WOMAN OR AS A LESBIAN. If economic or individual liberty is destroyed then nothing else matters.
Admirable, I'd say. She possesses much more clarity than many on FR.
I had a simple question...why did you feel the need to act like an @ss? It's not like it's the first time, you and I have disagreed many times before, with you being particularly disagreeable.
So...should gays be treated any differently than anyone else on FR? That was the question I pondered.
It appears the answer to that question, as expressed in many different ways on this thread, is: They shouldn't be posting here at all.
Sound about right? Can you be honest enough to admit it? All of you?
Now if we can also keep our logic excellent.
Because their "marriages" have been elevated in law to "equality" with natural marriages, it is heterosexual women who will suffer the most, including discrimination because they cannot plan and control the timing of their pregnancies as homosexuals can. They will be regarded as lacking in efficiency in the workplace and as "trapping" men and employers into supporting their unexpected events, including any complications from childbirth and/or nursing not suffered by adoptive gay men or turkey-baster lesbians. Homosexuals will begin demanding to set the standard for what they call "families" from their more employer-friendly and less messy synthetic child acquisition.
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.