GAY DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS UNITE TO SUPPORT FAMILIES OF TERROR VICTIMS

gaywire press releases ^ | 25 NOV 2001 | Kevin Ivers, Log Cabin Republicans Director of Public Affairs

[RobertBauman]

Is this really the bipartisanship we are looking for? Or have the homosexual groups seen fit to join together to promote their agenda of special rights. I can't believe this group called 'Log Cabin' (no pun intended) calls itself 'Republican'. This is some sick stuff if it has gone this far in being normalized. What has our society come to when we are now debating whether to give spousal benefits to groups of male sex partners?

[Captain Shady]

Is this really the bipartisanship we are looking for?

Politics really does make for STRANGE BEDFELLOWS after all.

I guess the LCR must be happy about the administrations choice of ambassador to Romania ,Mr. Richard Guest.

[blam]

REDHEADED DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS UNITE TO SUPPORT FAMILIES OF TERROR VICTIMS

See how silly this is.

[RobertBauman]

I noticed that too. A friend who works for WorldNetDaily sent me the press release and it originated from the group called 'Log Cabin', the homosexual 'Republicans'. But then they issued the press release spinning it as some kind of 'bipartisan' effort to help victims of Sept. 11th. Yet if you read the press release, it's just the same old stuff in which the homosexual militants are asking male-male sex partnerships or even groups of sex partners to be given the benefits of families and normal married couples. On its face, it is totally whacked.

[Fiddlstix]

GAY DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS UNITE TO SUPPORT FAMILIES OF TERROR VICTIMS

Big Deal
Who Cares

[martian_22]

The dreaded, intolerant heterosexuals also united to support victim's families.

Will wonders never cease?

[Oschisms]

Must you keep thrusting your redheadedness in my face?

And that other thing, too... :)

[jungleboy]

fr reaching a new low by posting this crap.

[Captain Shady]

REDHEADED DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS UNITE TO SUPPORT FAMILIES OF TERROR VICTIMS

Never could figure why folks frequently threaten to slap someone like a RED-HEADED STEPCHILD.

Most illogical isn't it?

[RobertBauman]

"Big Deal. Who Cares"

That's exactly what the homosexual activists are aiming for. When our culture is transformed enough so that when when your son Gary comes home and brings another boy, Bruce, as his date and parents just shrug "who cares", the homosexual crowd know they have won. Does anyone believe any more in the values and moral character this country was founded on? I doubt Thomas Jefferson or Ben Franklin would have just said "who cares" to homosexual special rights and normalization.

[RobertBauman]

WorldNetDaily got it right: Standing Up Against Evil

[RobertBauman]

Bump for a return to core Republican values.

[Fiddlstix]

That's exactly what the homosexual activists are aiming for.....

I agree with you.
My comment was aimed at the "so called" political aspect.
(Bi-partisanship)if you will.
I should have commented further to make that clear.

[Salem]

"Bump for a return to core Republican values."

And bump again.

[Media2Powerful]

First of all, to imply that the average gay person is monogamous is false. I would be interested in seeing a study done on the percentages, and I don't mean have you been monogamous this WEEK.

Secondly, these people can make wills just like anyone else. It sounds like a lot of greed to me. Available money brings a lot of open hands.

Also, what exactly is their loss, other than the same pain and grief suffered by friends and co-workers and extended families who cry and mourn but receive no cash.

This is nothing more than a backdoor approach to marriage---pun not intended but obvious. I think if they get charity money for a partner they had better be required also to pay the partners debt, taxes, and other outstanding liabilities.

[Marathon Man]

First of all, to imply that the average gay person is monogamous is false. I would be interested in seeing a study done on the percentages, and I don't mean have you been monogamous this WEEK.

True...but then, implying that the average American is monogamous would be false, and vastly more so if one took Christ's definition.

[Media2Powerful]

Hmm...you are right about that. What do you think of my point that they'd be getting benefits without the same liabilites, i.e. debt obligation, tax obligation, etc..? Married people pay their joint taxes, shared debt, etc.. It looks to me like it should either be both liabilities and assets, or none of the above. Why should someone get domestic partner death benefits without having to pay the partners credit card debt and the like?

[RLK]

An intersting public relations device, but it won't change my evaluation of them and their life style.

[Marathon Man]

Totally with you on that. Privilges and responsibilities should go hand in hand. I personally don't care whether or not gays and lesbians can be married in the eyes of the law because wedlock, to me, doesn't depend on the government for legitimacy. My wife would still be my wife even if the government didn't recognize the marriage.