Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?

[Teddy Pollins]

Dear republicans, some questions to you.
Are you a republican that supports gay marriage?
Are these terms absolutely opposite?
How about being a republican and believing that the state has no place in the church's institution of marriage?
I am trying to be straight.

 

[Seawytch]

What a stupid fucking question. Do you KNOW who Ted Olson is?

 

[Teddy Pollins]

What a stupid fucking question. Do you KNOW who Ted Olson is?

Ok, it's a stupid question. As I see You have preferred to answer with your own one to that " stupid"? I didn't hear about Ted Olson a word. Is it bad.
However it just seems to me a little bit strange when Republicans support homosexual movement...

 

[TemplarKormac]

Dear republicans, some questions to you.
Are you a republican that supports gay marriage?
Are these terms absolutely opposite?
How about being a republican and believing that the state has no place in the church's institution of marriage?
I am trying to be straight.

I am a "Republican" and I support gay marriage. Can you be a Democrat and support traditional marriage?

What happens if we divide by zero?

Ohhhhh sh---!

 

[suplex3000]

I have one idea. how about being a republican and not giving a f@ck? i care more about terrorist attacks on the mainland than i do some stupid self-actualization crisis some teenager is having. Government should think about safety and economical problems such as debts or total inequality... Whose sexuality is a theme of concern?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?"

Yes.

In fact, before the advent of the bane of the social right, republicans would have never advocated denying same-sex couples access to marriage law.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What a stupid fucking question. Do you KNOW who Ted Olson is?

Or Justice Anthony Kennedy.

 

[PratchettFan]

Dear republicans, some questions to you.
Are you a republican that supports gay marriage?
Are these terms absolutely opposite?
How about being a republican and believing that the state has no place in the church's institution of marriage?
I am trying to be straight.

Yes, I am and I don't support gay marriage. I support marriage period and I don't see it as the job of the government to decide who wants to get married. There is no such thing as gay marriage or straight marriage, there is only marriage.
No, they are not.
The state has no place in the church's anything.

 

[PratchettFan]

What a stupid fucking question. Do you KNOW who Ted Olson is?

Ok, it's a stupid question. As I see You have preferred to answer with your own one to that " stupid"? I didn't hear about Ted Olson a word. Is it bad.
However it just seems to me a little bit strange when Republicans support homosexual movement...

What is a "homosexual movement"?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Dear republicans, some questions to you.

I've been a registered Republican since 1978.

Are you a republican tha supports gay marriage?

Yes. Not so much that I support "gay marriage", that is the decision of the couple involved. However I support equal treatment under the law for homosexual couples to access Civil Marriage.

Don't confuse "Republican" with "Social Authoritarian", the terms are synonymous.

Are these terms absolutely opposite?

No.

A small government Republican viewpoint is that:

(A) Homosexuals should be treated equally under the law, therefore they should have equal access to Civil Marriage.

And

(B) Public Accommodation laws should be repealed so that private business owners can exercise rights of property and association in their business decisions. That does not mean give special rights for someone to hide behind religion, it means repeal of the laws as they apply to private busniess. If a business wants to turn away a customer based on race, religion, national origin, sex, or sexual orientation it should be in their power to do so.​

How about being a republican and believing that the state has no place in the church's institution of marriage?

Civil Marriage is marriage under secular law, it is a separate entity from religious marriage.

You can have a Civil Marriage with no religous component, therefore it is not associated with a religious institution.

You can have a Religious marriage with no civil component, therefore it is not associate or recognized under civil law.

They are separate entities.

I am trying to be straight.

If your orientation is to have sex with someone of the same gender as you, you don't' have to pretend to be straight. It's OK.


>>>>

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course.
Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?

 

[Redfish]

Of course.
Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?

This is really not a partisan question or issue. Its a question of cultural and societal beliefs of right and wrong.

The question should be: Does the american society consider homosexuality to be a normal human condition?

and the answer should be provided by society as a whole, not 9 judges, or the legislature, or the president.

the morals and ethics of a society should be decided by the entire society, by majority opinion.

If the majority of americans consider homosexuality to be a normal human condition, then that majority should condone gay marriage, if it does not, then that majority should provide for legal gay unions that provide the same rights and benefits that marriage provides.

 

[martybegan]

"Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?"

Yes.

In fact, before the advent of the bane of the social right, republicans would have never advocated denying same-sex couples access to marriage law.

They would, however, not have wanted the courts to decide it, but for it to be decided by the people via legislative action.

 

[Seawytch]

Of course.
Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?

This is really not a partisan question or issue. Its a question of cultural and societal beliefs of right and wrong.

The question should be: Does the american society consider homosexuality to be a normal human condition?

and the answer should be provided by society as a whole, not 9 judges, or the legislature, or the president.

the morals and ethics of a society should be decided by the entire society, by majority opinion.

If the majority of americans consider homosexuality to be a normal human condition, then that majority should condone gay marriage, if it does not, then that majority should provide for legal gay unions that provide the same rights and benefits that marriage provides.

Oh look, Fishy is in another gay thread that he swore he'd never comment on again. And did he bring up an new issue? Nope, his same tired canard.

 

[Redfish]

"Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?"

Yes.

In fact, before the advent of the bane of the social right, republicans would have never advocated denying same-sex couples access to marriage law.

They would, however, not have wanted the courts to decide it, but for it to be decided by the people via legislative action.

Agree, society as a whole should decide what society considers right and wrong.

 

[PratchettFan]

"Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?"

Yes.

In fact, before the advent of the bane of the social right, republicans would have never advocated denying same-sex couples access to marriage law.

They would, however, not have wanted the courts to decide it, but for it to be decided by the people via legislative action.

Republicans are just as likely to seek redress from the courts as democrats.

 

[martybegan]

"Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?"

Yes.

In fact, before the advent of the bane of the social right, republicans would have never advocated denying same-sex couples access to marriage law.

They would, however, not have wanted the courts to decide it, but for it to be decided by the people via legislative action.

Agree, society as a whole should decide what society considers right and wrong.

One exception I would have taken is that while States do not have to ISSUE SSM licenses, they would have to recognize and respect those from States that had passed SSM.

 

[martybegan]

"Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?"

Yes.

In fact, before the advent of the bane of the social right, republicans would have never advocated denying same-sex couples access to marriage law.

They would, however, not have wanted the courts to decide it, but for it to be decided by the people via legislative action.

Republicans are just as likely to seek redress from the courts as democrats.

Typically conservatives have been fighting to restore/maintain existing rights, while progressives have been trying to create new ones out of thin air.

 

[Redfish]

"Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?"

Yes.

In fact, before the advent of the bane of the social right, republicans would have never advocated denying same-sex couples access to marriage law.

They would, however, not have wanted the courts to decide it, but for it to be decided by the people via legislative action.

Agree, society as a whole should decide what society considers right and wrong.

One exception I would have taken is that while States do not have to ISSUE SSM licenses, they would have to recognize and respect those from States that had passed SSM.

I don't see how that could work. Besides the benefits of marriage are primarily federal tax benefits. But if a SSM must be accepted in every state, then my concealed carry permit should also be accepted in every state.

 

[Redfish]

"Can you be a republican and support gay marriage?"

Yes.

In fact, before the advent of the bane of the social right, republicans would have never advocated denying same-sex couples access to marriage law.

They would, however, not have wanted the courts to decide it, but for it to be decided by the people via legislative action.

Republicans are just as likely to seek redress from the courts as democrats.

Typically conservatives have been fighting to restore/maintain existing rights, while progressives have been trying to create new ones out of thin air.

I would go a step further, progressives are trying to legislate morals and find ways to punish thoughts and opinions.