Trump says it’s time to move on from gay ‘marriage’ battle: ‘The Supreme Court ruled.’

LifeSiteNews ^ | 8/25/15 | Dustin Siggins

[wagglebee]

LOS ANGELES, CA, August 25, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) – The GOP's leading presidential candidate said that he has been to a gay "wedding" and that conservatives should accept the Supreme Court's redefinition of marriage.

In a wide-ranging interview with The Hollywood Reporter, Donald Trump was asked whether the issue of marriage's redefinition is "a dead issue for the GOP at this point."

"Some people have hopes of passing amendments [to the U.S. Constitution]," said Trump, "but it's not going to happen. Congress can't pass simple things, let alone that. So anybody that's making that an issue is doing it for political reasons. The Supreme Court ruled on it."

In June, Trump told CNN's Jake Tapper that he had evolved on the issue of marriage, and supports "traditional marriage." At the time, he was pressed by Tapper on whether Trump's three marriages undermined his position.

"They have a very good point," said Trump. "I have a great marriage. I have a great wife now. And I – my two wives were very good. And I don't blame them. But I was working, maybe like you, 22 hours a day."

"I blame myself because my business was so powerful for me. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing," he said.

Trump told the Reporter that he had been to the gay "wedding" of Broadway theater owner Jordan Roth.

[Elsie]

When states lost their balls.

[Elsie]

The problem with Trump is that he has changed positions over the last 2 decades on ...

Hell!

Who HASN'T???

[Elsie]

I will give a very clear example, not long ago (2007/8/9) time, he suggested a “one time wealth tax of 14%.”

ME me!!!!

I'd GLADLY give 14, 28, 35% ONE TIME tax!

[Elsie]

Our illegal situation is nothing but the product of supply and demand - PLUS - a porous border for 70 years - AND made worse by abortion depleted supply.

I'd like to thank the United States Government for protecting me and my kind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You see, 40 years ago, my odds of making it out of the egg, alive, were very poor; about 80% of us died. 

 (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rachel-carson-silent-spring-1972-ddt-ban-birds-thrive)

 

 

But a lady discovered our plight and wrote a book that addressed our problem,

and, in 1972, a law was ammended protecting us even further. (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.html)

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I find strange is that the same government passed a law the very next year that allowed for killing

of unborn, and apparently unwanted, humans.  Little ones still nestled safely in their Mother's womb.

Around 25% of them are dying before birth - on average nearly 3,300 - every day of the year.

 

 

I hear that by now, somewhere around 55 MILLION of them have perished.

Wouldn't that kind of mess up the humans plans for growth, and welfare, and

retirement?

 

 

 

 

 

Strange birds; these Homo Sapiens.  Perhaps they'll come to their senses

before they are ALL dead!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'd like to thank the United States Government for protecting me and my kind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You see, 40 years ago, my odds of making it out of the egg, alive, were very poor; about 80% of us died. 

 (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rachel-carson-silent-spring-1972-ddt-ban-birds-thrive)

 

 

But a lady discovered our plight and wrote a book that addressed our problem,

and, in 1972, a law was ammended protecting us even further. (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.html)

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I find strange is that the same government passed a law the very next year that allowed for killing

of unborn, and apparently unwanted, humans.  Little ones still nestled safely in their Mother's womb.

Around 25% of them are dying before birth - on average nearly 3,300 - every day of the year.

 

 

I hear that by now, somewhere around 55 MILLION of them have perished.

Wouldn't that kind of mess up the humans plans for growth, and welfare, and

retirement?

 

 

 

 

 

Strange birds; these Homo Sapiens.  Perhaps they'll come to their senses

before they are ALL dead!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Elsie]

As long as we have the concept of "public accommodation", where anybody doing business has to accept as customers anybody who comes to them, then we will have Christians being driven out of business over their refusal to associate with immorality.

Business exclude who they want all the time!

No shirt, no shoes.....

No guns or weapons in here...

Ties must be worn...

[Elsie]

So understand this. Trump will say and do ANYTHING and change his stance at ANYTIME.

You DO know this is how to round up LOW info voters; right?

They hear ONLY what appeals to them and ignore the rest.

You ok with FAGS? Vote for me!
FAGS drive you nuts? Vote for me.

[Elsie]

If you forced GE to stop selling home appliances, would you have anything left?

LOTS!!

[Elsie]

America needs leadership not showmanship.

Read your money...

Either DO it; or quit LYING about it!

[Elsie]

I have no problem with "civil unions" that would allow tax benefits and other legal rights, but Marriage is strictly limited to a man and a woman.

A rose; by any other name; would be called something else.

[9YearLurker]

Ha ha—they must be on to something.

[sten]

unfortunately, you’re right.

we need to help them rediscover them.

[BillyBoy]

>> Trump does not support homosexual marriage. <<

News to Trump's pal Jordan Roth, since The Donald happily attended his "wedding" to another man.

[xzins]

Who hasn't

Exactly. More to the point for me, though, is getting candidates who have not changed their positions, but then they get to the final drive in a campaign and indicate they'll not govern as a conservative. Who cares that all the candidates for Congress said the right things? Somewhere between the voting booth and halls of Congress they were castrated.

What good does that do?

My sense, actually, is that they lied about who they were.

Why not gamble on Trump? He can't be worse than that.

It's like the parable Jesus told about the 2 sons who were asked by their Father to do a job. The one said that, yes, he would do it. But he didn't. The other said, no, that he wouldn't, but then he did. Jesus summed it up: "Which on did the will of his father?"

All the Yes men say they're with us, and then they aren't. We have a man who hasn't been with us for long, but if he ends up really with us, then who actually was the one we were looking for? Those who didn't do what they'd said, or the one who wasn't with us, but then did what we'd hoped for?

[TomasUSMC]

This might be the right time for Trump to evolve....before he starts to dissolve.

For or against fudge packin.

All you got to say is that it is a lifestyle of extinction and that is why society and religion and common sense has always been against it.

That’s all.

[Unam Sanctam]

Did he say anything about religious freedom and the rights of those who object in conscience to unnatural “marriage”? Sorry, this issue is fundamental for me in any candidate.

[Catsrus]

I don’t honestly know. However, he has said more than once about the Christians who are getting beheaded in the Middle East and how that needs to be addressed. So far, I think he is the only candidate who has even mentioned this horrible atrocity going on. I know this is a fundamental issue - as it is with me - however, I’m not naive enough to believe that any candidate can do much about it. I think the answer lies in a change in the Supreme Court and taking the issue back to there.+

Having said that - that bell can’t be unrung - by the time a new president gets into office - which is about a year a half away - the damage will be already done. There is an answer, however, and that is for Congress to pass a law that supports religion freedom on this issue and the president to sign it. Now, we know the evil one currently in the WH is not going to sign such a law, and I seriously doubt that the feckless, useless wimps in Congree would even introduce one - right now. We lost this battle for now, but not the war. There is no way a president or candidate can go back and tell the gays who have “married,” that they are no longer married.

[Elsie]

WE can only pray for discernment; and if we are still confused; I guess we could get the fleece out.

[verga]

A rose; by any other name; would be called something else.

Not true Civil unions are performed by judges, justices of the peace, ship's captains etc... They grant legal status, but are not viewed as religious.

One performed by an ordained minister/ priest is by definition religious and should have God's place in the marriage as it's focus. It also gives legal status, but that is secondary to God's blessing to the couple.

[Elsie]

Not true Civil unions are performed by judges, justices of the peace, ship's captains etc... They grant legal status, but are not viewed as religious.

Then why weren't they used for fags who marry?

Because they are NOT legal.

Well; they Weren't.

Burning Jews in ovens was 'legal'; too.

[verga]

I can see that you are off your meds again, have a good day.