Huckabee:Evangelicals Will Walk if GOP Backs Gay Marriage

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Republicans on gay rights will be another case of them being on the wrong side of history. They will ultimately claim that they were in favor of it all along but thought it was a states rights issue

Another case? When was the first? Methinks you are confusing the racist and slaver Democrats with the Republicans who freed them.

No, it’s where conservatives were on the wrong side of history with regard to privacy rights during the 70s, and on the wrong side of history with regard to voting rights during the 60s, and on the wrong side of history with regard to civil rights during the 50s – conservatives fought to preserve segregation, they fought against civil rights and voting rights, they fought to disallow blacks and whites to marry, and they fought against the privacy rights of women.

And in classic conservative tradition, they fight against the equal protection rights of same-sex couples, on the wrong side of history – again.

 

[candycorn]

Huckabee: Evangelicals Will Walk if GOP Backs Gay Marriage


Mike Huckabee warns that Republicans risk losing the vote from evangelical Christians if they back away from their opposition to gay marriage.

Last week, Ohio Sen. Bob Portman announced he has reversed his position and now supports gay marriage.

In an exclusive interview with Newsmax TV, former Arkansas Gov. Huckabee — and ordained Southern Baptist minister — was asked if he sees the GOP ever pivoting and backing gay marriage.

“They might. And if they do, they’re going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk,” he responds.



Good
Riddance.

You won't be missed and maybe, just maybe the GOP can get back to the Constitution without them.

There is no where for them to go

They can go to the same place the democrats sent the liberals in ‘92: the back seat.

Let me propose this scenario:

Lets say one one side of the spectrum--about 20% is the TEA party Republicans who first and foremost see the GOP as the fiscally responsible party of the two; are for lower taxes, cutting spending, and don't really get into the whole "soul of the nation" argument. On the other side of the spectrum--about 30% is the Christian Conservatives who first and foremost see the GOP as the logical counterbalance to the lax morality sponsored by the liberal democrats are anti-gay marriage, anti-abortion, etc....

I give them 10% more because they've been around longer.

So that leave a 50% blend of those that have mixed views. Those who would rather see no gay marriage but won't go to the mat over it; those who would rather see no new taxes but would be willing to listen to anyone with a solution to the fiscal problems...

I guess in a political sense, it's about winners and losers. Who wins if the Christian Conservative coalition walks; I don't think that the remaining 20% of the GOP as we know it automatically "wins" because they're still standing. There is no winner in this because the few large TEA party rallies you see from time to time and the ones you'll see on April 15 are nothing compared to the constant hum of activity provided by the CC. They should not be cast aside lightly. Because if they're not in the tent, they're all the way out except possibly at the voting booth; if they choose to vote at all.

The only option is skillful engagement of the group. It should also be noted that within the group there are hardliners who want total objection to, lets say, gay marriage, those who may be happy with a deviation from the Full Faith and Credit clause to where Georgia doesn't have to honor gay marriages and those who could be pacified with a simple lack of objection but an equal abstaining from any hint of embracing gay marriage.

Price Phebus needs to reach the thinkers in the coalition and see if they can bring their associated constituencies along. What is likely the outcome is that the GOP at large needs to embrace those who look, sound, and act differently than they do If they do so hitting on all 8 cylinders, the effort to reach out to those individuals is easier. If they're taking on water by having their confederation fall apart while trying to expand, the return to power will be delayed.

 

[asaratis]

Where do conservatives come up with this silly bullshit?

Dude, what party do you think the Confederates were? What party was Bull Conner? Now, what party was Lincoln? A higher percentage of GOP voted for the Civil Rights Bill than did a percent of Dems. Just how illiterate of history are you?

I love when conservatives try to tell me that the party that elected a black guy as the most powerful man in the world and has several times more minority politicians in it's ranks is racists. Makes me laugh every time. Now what other irrelevant historical events from centuries ago would you like to cite to try to make your argument for the modern day?

The party that elected the black guy (twice) is replete with racists and racism.

 

[KnobbyWalsh]

Over 150 years ago. You know, "current events!" hahahaha

Well...now we know what century Avatar is stuck in.

I always knew that from his dress. It's so 1863.

I reenacted the Civil War for 12 years - dudes, WE got it made compared to how those people lived!

 

[SinJinsg]

Where do conservatives come up with this silly bullshit?

Dude, what party do you think the Confederates were? What party was Bull Conner? Now, what party was Lincoln? A higher percentage of GOP voted for the Civil Rights Bill than did a percent of Dems. Just how illiterate of history are you?

I love when conservatives try to tell me that the party that elected a black guy as the most powerful man in the world and has several times more minority politicians in it's ranks is racists. Makes me laugh every time. Now what other irrelevant historical events from centuries ago would you like to cite to try to make your argument for the modern day?

The 60s was "centuries" ago? Really? You are just desperate now. And you elected a puppet. Nothing more. If he wasn't one of your owned slaves on your plantation you would never have elected him. Any black that strays off of the Democrat plantation is hunted and lynched.

 

[SinJinsg]

Republicans on gay rights will be another case of them being on the wrong side of history. They will ultimately claim that they were in favor of it all along but thought it was a states rights issue

Another case? When was the first? Methinks you are confusing the racist and slaver Democrats with the Republicans who freed them.

No, it’s where conservatives were on the wrong side of history with regard to privacy rights during the 70s, and on the wrong side of history with regard to voting rights during the 60s, and on the wrong side of history with regard to civil rights during the 50s – conservatives fought to preserve segregation, they fought against civil rights and voting rights, they fought to disallow blacks and whites to marry, and they fought against the privacy rights of women.

And in classic conservative tradition, they fight against the equal protection rights of same-sex couples, on the wrong side of history – again.

More revisionist history. First of all, there was never a fight over "privacy" in the 70s, it was a fight to legalize abortion. Nothing more. And it was the Democrats who were pushing segregation and Jim Crow laws. You honestly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

And gay marriage has NOTHING to do with civil rights. Homosexuality is a choice and sexual perversion. It is not something a person is born with like the color of their skin.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Will they walk to a third party and split the GOP?

Awesome.

 

[uscitizen]

Huckabee:Evangelicals Will Walk if GOP Backs Gay Marriage


LMAO!
Where are they gonna walk to?

GOP, Please back Gay Marriage. I wanna watch the death march.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Huckabee:Evangelicals Will Walk if GOP Backs Gay Marriage


LMAO!
Where are they gonna walk to?

.

Probably Luby's, for second breakfast.

 

[Avatar4321]

Evangelicals are killing the party

In other words, you think the Republican Party would be best served if it just one day lost all it's morals and became like the Demokkkratt party?

No, I think the Republican Party would be best served if they returned to sanity

what do you know about sanity? and why when sanity is so boring?

 

[Avatar4321]

Evangelicals are killing the party

In other words, you think the Republican Party would be best served if it just one day lost all it's morals and became like the Demokkkratt party?

Wait.....you think evangelicals have a monopoly on morals?

No. just that progressives dont have any

 

[Avatar4321]

Slavery and segregation?

When?

Over 150 years ago. You know, "current events!" hahahaha

Well...now we know what century Avatar is stuck in.

Well, when someone is talking about being on the right or wrong side of history, it's usually prudent to actually look at history.

Crazy concept i know.

 

[Avatar4321]

Another case? Wouldn't you need a first case?

And yet you support the party of slavery and segregation.

Slavery and segregation?

When?

He's trying to say that the party that elected a black guy the most powerful man in the world is racist.

That isnt what im saying at all. It's true. But it's not what im saying.

I would think that someone who proclaims themself as intellegent such as yourself would be able to follow the conversation about being on the right and wrong side of history.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Huckabee:Evangelicals Will Walk if GOP Backs Gay Marriage


LMAO!
Where are they gonna walk to?

GOP, Please back Gay Marriage. I wanna watch the death march.

March of the Penguins.

 

[Avatar4321]

Where do conservatives come up with this silly bullshit?

Dude, what party do you think the Confederates were? What party was Bull Conner? Now, what party was Lincoln? A higher percentage of GOP voted for the Civil Rights Bill than did a percent of Dems. Just how illiterate of history are you?

I love when conservatives try to tell me that the party that elected a black guy as the most powerful man in the world and has several times more minority politicians in it's ranks is racists. Makes me laugh every time. Now what other irrelevant historical events from centuries ago would you like to cite to try to make your argument for the modern day?

You don't seem to understand what racism is.

The fact that you are pointing at his race as why you voted for him tells us you are racist.

 

[NYcarbineer]

He's trying to say that the party that elected a black guy the most powerful man in the world is racist.

Democrats have always been the party of slavery and segregation. Who do you think ran the South for all those years? And nothing has changed. The Dems STILL demand the black population serve them on the Democrat plantation. None are allowed to leave.

Where do conservatives come up with this silly bullshit?

It comes from the part of the brain that normal humans evolved away several centuries ago.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Another case? When was the first? Methinks you are confusing the racist and slaver Democrats with the Republicans who freed them.

No, it’s where conservatives were on the wrong side of history with regard to privacy rights during the 70s, and on the wrong side of history with regard to voting rights during the 60s, and on the wrong side of history with regard to civil rights during the 50s – conservatives fought to preserve segregation, they fought against civil rights and voting rights, they fought to disallow blacks and whites to marry, and they fought against the privacy rights of women.

And in classic conservative tradition, they fight against the equal protection rights of same-sex couples, on the wrong side of history – again.

More revisionist history. First of all, there was never a fight over "privacy" in the 70s, it was a fight to legalize abortion. Nothing more. And it was the Democrats who were pushing segregation and Jim Crow laws. You honestly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

And gay marriage has NOTHING to do with civil rights. Homosexuality is a choice and sexual perversion. It is not something a person is born with like the color of their skin.

People aren't born a specific religion or with guns in their hands. Does that mean there shouldn't be gun rights and religious freedom?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In other words, you think the Republican Party would be best served if it just one day lost all it's morals and became like the Demokkkratt party?

Wait.....you think evangelicals have a monopoly on morals?

No. just that progressives dont have any

Now you know that’s nonsense.

The vast majority of progressives and liberals are Christian, and an even larger majority are ‘persons of faith.’ And they are just as moral as conservatives and republicans, if not more so.

The difference is, however, they understand and accept the simple Constitutional tenet of separation of church and state, and the prohibition of conjoining religious dogma with secular law. Indeed, they not only understand that in addition to denying same-sex couples their equal protection rights is a violation of one’s civil liberties, it is also an immoral violation of a person's humanity, dignity, and inalienable right to self-determination.

Discrimination is not only illegal, it’s immoral, an immoral act advocated by the right.

 

[bodecea]

In other words, you think the Republican Party would be best served if it just one day lost all it's morals and became like the Demokkkratt party?

Wait.....you think evangelicals have a monopoly on morals?

No. just that progressives dont have any

And you have the evidence to back that comment up......where?


Of course, I can understand your stance.....you probably hate that it was progressives that brought the vote to women, got rid of child labor, eliminated segregation, introduced equal protection for the handicapped. Awful things those.

 

[bodecea]

Wait.....you think evangelicals have a monopoly on morals?

No. just that progressives dont have any

Now you know that’s nonsense.

The vast majority of progressives and liberals are Christian, and an even larger majority are ‘persons of faith.’ And they are just as moral as conservatives and republicans, if not more so.

The difference is, however, they understand and accept the simple Constitutional tenet of separation of church and state, and the prohibition of conjoining religious dogma with secular law. Indeed, they not only understand that in addition to denying same-sex couples their equal protection rights is a violation of one’s civil liberties, it is also an immoral violation of a person's humanity, dignity, and inalienable right to self-determination.

Discrimination is not only illegal, it’s immoral, an immoral act advocated by the right.

Avatar's working on the first steps towards dehumanizing Progressives and Liberals.