GOP Debate: Constitutional Ban On Same-Sex Marriage Wins Big

  • metta

    Posts: 39146

    Jun 14, 2011 3:44 PM GMT
    GOP Debate: Constitutional Ban On Same-Sex Marriage Wins Big

    "Five of the seven Republican presidential candidates at Monday night’s GOP debate said they want a constitutional amendment banning same-​sex marriage. Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum all stated if they were elected president, they would support anti-​gay discrimination written directly into the constitution."

    http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/gop-debate-constitutional-ban-on-same-sex-marriage-wins-big/dont-ask-dont-tell/2011/06/14/22085
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 7:04 PM GMT
    How exactly is this news? The majority of the GOP (although not necessarily their supporters) tend to follow as many of Reagan's philosophies as possible.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 7:08 PM GMT
    Bullwinklemoos saidHow exactly is this news? The majority of the GOP (although not necessarily their supporters) tend to follow as many of Reagan's philosophies as possible.


    Reagan didnt do anything with gay marriage. It wasnt an issue then. I think you mean Bush.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 7:10 PM GMT
    There is a HUGE difference between not supporting gay marriage and supporting a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage altogether. I lean more Republican but will NOT vote for anyone who wants a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage..
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 7:14 PM GMT
    And the "gay" Republican robots on this site cheer, and support the GOP that endorses a US Constitutional ban against same-sex marriage and unions. They certainly do nothing to oppose it.

    Remember, their contradictory mantra is: "We're not anti-gay, we just support and vote for those who are."

    "So we're pro-gay ourselves, because we claim we are, believe us. Even if everything we do, say, support and vote for is anti-gay."

    Well that makes sense... icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 7:21 PM GMT
    Dallasfan824 said
    Bullwinklemoos saidHow exactly is this news? The majority of the GOP (although not necessarily their supporters) tend to follow as many of Reagan's philosophies as possible.


    Reagan didnt do anything with gay marriage. It wasnt an issue then. I think you mean Bush.
    Oh so I did. icon_redface.gif Him too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 7:22 PM GMT
    I knew that most of them were not supporters of gay marriage, but it was rather disheartening to see they were so against it that they supported a constitutional amendment. In addition, most seemed to be supporters of DADT, some even supporting reinstating that policy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 7:24 PM GMT
    metta8 saidGOP Debate: Constitutional Ban On Same-Sex Marriage Wins Big

    "Five of the seven Republican presidential candidates at Monday night’s GOP debate said they want a constitutional amendment banning same-​sex marriage. Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum all stated if they were elected president, they would support anti-​gay discrimination written directly into the constitution."

    http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/gop-debate-constitutional-ban-on-same-sex-marriage-wins-big/dont-ask-dont-tell/2011/06/14/22085



    That's why (besides other reasons) when I see gay republicans on the site, I wonder WTF is wrong with these guys?

    Then again, here in Canada, even our conservatives seem liberals to them!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 7:26 PM GMT
    They were just throwing red meat out to their base. While some may be unaware of the changing trends, I'll bet most know there is a diminishing interest in even trying for the constitutional amendment, knowing that there is almost no chance of enough states to ratify it--all of which will likely take more time.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jun 14, 2011 7:31 PM GMT
    1969er saidThey were just throwing red meat out to their base. While some may be unaware of the changing trends, I'll bet most know there is a diminishing interest in even trying for the constitutional amendment, knowing that there is almost no chance of enough states to ratify it--all of which will likely take more time.


    Absolutely true.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 7:31 PM GMT
    van_can said
    metta8 saidGOP Debate: Constitutional Ban On Same-Sex Marriage Wins Big

    "Five of the seven Republican presidential candidates at Monday night’s GOP debate said they want a constitutional amendment banning same-​sex marriage. Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum all stated if they were elected president, they would support anti-​gay discrimination written directly into the constitution."

    http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/gop-debate-constitutional-ban-on-same-sex-marriage-wins-big/dont-ask-dont-tell/2011/06/14/22085



    That's why (besides other reasons) when I see gay republicans on the site, I wonder WTF is wrong with these guys?



    A gay Republican is not so myopic as to see EVERYTHING about gay marriage. The world does not revolve around gay marriage. We have huge economic concerns that are much larger than gay marriage. And some of "us" believe that Democrats don't have the answers on these much larger issues.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:00 PM GMT
    justlookinghv saidA gay Republican is not so myopic as to see EVERYTHING about gay marriage. The world does not revolve around gay marriage. We have huge economic concerns that are much larger than gay marriage. And some of "us" believe that Democrats don't have the answers on these much larger issues.

    This is a significant point. There are many things of interest to me: the US economy, the Iraq & Afghanistan conflicts, Islamic terrorism, and, of course, gay rights.

    But when the US Republican Party wants to make me illegal, make my being gay a criminal offense (I've posted the citations & links in threads here before), then that takes personal priority over everything else. I believe Black Americans faced the same situation 50 years ago with Democrat Southerners, along with national Republicans.

    The argument then was: "We gotta fight these Commies, and threats to the American way of life. So you Blacks forget about these issues like poll taxes, and sitting at the back of the bus, unequal segregated schools, and discrimination, etc, you're just being selfish & disruptive. You gotta think about the big picture, of States Rights, and the Right-Wing White view of America, and put your hardships & differences aside. (And I'm one of the few guys here to have actually lived through that period)

    This is what Republicans today are doing with gays. Much of their view is again based on "States Rights" to deny civil rights to gays, just like they did with Blacks.

    And that any gays would buy onto that is disgusting, saying: "Oh, yeah! I'd rather be a discrimination victim, so millionaires can have an even greater part of US wealth! Sign me up to social & economic inequality! And making me illegal in my own country. I'm really into the victim scene! So others can profit at my expense!" icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:03 PM GMT
    It's a non-issue...


    They will never pass such an amendment... Hell I bet they couldn't find someone with sufficient constitutional legal expertise that would be willing to draft such an amendment

    and that pack of morons know as much...but they 'would support it'

    in reality 'support' means 'I don't intend to fight against it' but I'm not going to risk my personal reputation shackling myself to what will surely be the titanic amendment proposed by a certified nutcase

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:07 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    justlookinghv saidA gay Republican is not so myopic as to see EVERYTHING about gay marriage. The world does not revolve around gay marriage. We have huge economic concerns that are much larger than gay marriage. And some of "us" believe that Democrats don't have the answers on these much larger issues.

    This is a significant point. There are many things of interest to me: the US economy, the Iraq & Afghanistan conflicts, Islamic terrorism, and, of course, gay rights.

    But when the US Republican Party wants to make me illegal, make my being gay a criminal offense (I've posted the citations & links in threads here before), then that takes personal priority over everything else. I believe Black Americans faced the same situation 50 years ago with Democrat Southerners, along with national Republicans.



    Please point me to the links you are referring to as I am a newbie here. I personally have never heard of the Republican Party wanting to make being gay illegal or a criminal offense. Deny gays certain rights, yes, and I *completely* disagree with them on that. But make it illegal or criminal to be gay, I've never heard anything about that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:10 PM GMT
    But when it comes down to it, the liberals on here still wouldn't be willing to support a GOP candidate like Ron Paul who is not interested in pursuing any kind of anti-gay agenda, so in the end we discover that they're just full of horse manure in pretending that they are pro-gay rights and anyone with economically liberal (conservative) views are self-haters.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:11 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    justlookinghv saidA gay Republican is not so myopic as to see EVERYTHING about gay marriage. The world does not revolve around gay marriage. We have huge economic concerns that are much larger than gay marriage. And some of "us" believe that Democrats don't have the answers on these much larger issues.

    This is a significant point. There are many things of interest to me: the US economy, the Iraq & Afghanistan conflicts, Islamic terrorism, and, of course, gay rights.

    But when the US Republican Party wants to make me illegal, make my being gay a criminal offense (I've posted the citations & links in threads here before), then that takes personal priority over everything else. I believe Black Americans faced the same situation 50 years ago with Democrat Southerners, along with national Republicans.

    The argument then was: "We gotta fight these Commies, and threats to the American way of life. So you Blacks forget about these issues like poll taxes, and sitting at the back of the bus, unequal segregated schools, and discrimination, etc, you're just being selfish & disruptive. You gotta think about the big picture, of States Rights, and the Right-Wing White view of America, and put your hardships & differences aside. (And I'm one of the few guys here to have actually lived through that period)

    This is what Republicans today are doing with gays. Much of their view is again based on "States Rights" to deny civil rights to gays, just like they did with Blacks.

    And that any gays would buy onto that is disgusting, saying: "Oh, yeah! I'd rather be a discrimination victim, so millionaires can have an even greater part of US wealth! Sign me up to social & economic inequality! And making me illegal in my own country. I'm really into the victim scene! So others can profit at my expense!" icon_rolleyes.gif


    Did you take a similar posture when democrats did the same thing?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:11 PM GMT
    MsclDrew saidIt's a non-issue...

    Prop 8 in "liberal" California was considered a non-issue, until the Catholics and Mornons used their political muscle (technically illegal under the doctrine of separation of Church & State, but who will prosecute them?) to produce a major anti-gay win.

    Which Republican robots here on this site supported and cheered when it happened.

    Do not dismiss as a "non-issue" an anti-gay US Constitutional amendment. This is what the Repubs are aiming for. They may win, as they did in California, and also in Maine, another State where it was thought such a bigoted amendment couldn't pass, but did. And again the Republican robots on RJ cheered, and patted themselves on the back.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:13 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    MsclDrew saidIt's a non-issue...

    Prop 8 in "liberal" California was considered a non-issue, until the Catholics and Mornons used their political muscle (technically illegal, but who will prosecute them?) to produce a major anti-gay win.

    Which Republican robots here on this site supported and cheered when it happened.

    Do not dismiss as a "non-issue" an anti-gay US Constitutional amendment. This is what the Repubs are aiming for. They may win, as they did in California, and also in Maine, another State where it was thought such a bigoted amendment couldn't pass, but did. And again the Republican robots on RJ cheered, and patted themselves on the back.


    You have a very poor understanding as to why prop 8 failed. It has nothing to do with republicans.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:15 PM GMT
    Dallasfan824 said
    Art_Deco said
    MsclDrew saidIt's a non-issue...

    Prop 8 in "liberal" California was considered a non-issue, until the Catholics and Mornons used their political muscle (technically illegal, but who will prosecute them?) to produce a major anti-gay win.

    Which Republican robots here on this site supported and cheered when it happened.

    Do not dismiss as a "non-issue" an anti-gay US Constitutional amendment. This is what the Repubs are aiming for. They may win, as they did in California, and also in Maine, another State where it was thought such a bigoted amendment couldn't pass, but did. And again the Republican robots on RJ cheered, and patted themselves on the back.


    You have a very poor understanding as to why prop 8 failed. It has nothing to do with republicans.


    And it's noteworthy to mentioned that the inner city democratic voters supported prop 8 by a larger margin than the republican suburban areas.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:22 PM GMT
    I strongly urge everyone—and especially those who believe they might vote Republican—to call the campaign offices of every one of these people and lambast them for this dreadful statement.

    Being pro Gay Marriage is entirely consistent with Republican values, and it is shameful that these people are so myopic. But they will not change their minds unless they are told to do so by people who might vote for them.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:24 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidYou have a very poor understanding as to why prop 8 failed. It has nothing to do with republicans.

    ummm... Prop 8 PASSED, not failed. I would question who has the "very poor understanding" of it.

    It ELIMINATED gay marriage rights in the State, which their Supreme Court had permitted.

    So please explain. If Republican support of it was not a factor, with their religious allies and out-of-state funding from the right-wing, when opposition to passing it led in all the polls until just months before the election, then please tell us why it passed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:25 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    mocktwinkie saidYou have a very poor understanding as to why prop 8 failed. It has nothing to do with republicans.

    ummm... Prop 8 PASSED, not failed. I would question who has the "very poor understanding" of it.

    It ELIMINATED gay marriage rights in the State, which their Supreme Court had permitted.

    So please explain. If Republican support of it was not a factor, with their religious allies and out-of-state funding from the right-wing, when opposition to passing it led in all the polls until just months before the election, please tell us why it passed.


    Why are you misquoting me? I never said that! But he meant to say passed, not failed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:26 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidI strongly urge everyone—and especially those who believe they might vote Republican—to call the campaign offices of every one of these people and lambast them for this dreadful statement.

    Being pro Gay Marriage is entirely consistent with Republican values, and it is shameful that these people are so myopic. But they will not change their minds unless they are told to do so by people who might vote for them.



    I fully agree with you here! It is quite shameful and disheartening to see so many of these candidates standing up for regressive social policies.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:28 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    Art_Deco said
    mocktwinkie saidYou have a very poor understanding as to why prop 8 failed. It has nothing to do with republicans.

    ummm... Prop 8 PASSED, not failed. I would question who has the "very poor understanding" of it.

    It ELIMINATED gay marriage rights in the State, which their Supreme Court had permitted.

    So please explain. If Republican support of it was not a factor, with their religious allies and out-of-state funding from the right-wing, when opposition to passing it led in all the polls until just months before the election, please tell us why it passed.

    Why are you misquoting me? I never said that!

    Anyone can scroll back and see that you wrote, verbatim:

    "You have a very poor understanding as to why prop 8 failed. It has nothing to do with republicans."

    So what I'm gonna do, before you delete it, is to quote the whole thing below, so it can't go away.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2011 8:28 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    Dallasfan824 said
    Art_Deco said
    MsclDrew saidIt's a non-issue...

    Prop 8 in "liberal" California was considered a non-issue, until the Catholics and Mornons used their political muscle (technically illegal, but who will prosecute them?) to produce a major anti-gay win.

    Which Republican robots here on this site supported and cheered when it happened.

    Do not dismiss as a "non-issue" an anti-gay US Constitutional amendment. This is what the Repubs are aiming for. They may win, as they did in California, and also in Maine, another State where it was thought such a bigoted amendment couldn't pass, but did. And again the Republican robots on RJ cheered, and patted themselves on the back.

    You have a very poor understanding as to why prop 8 failed. It has nothing to do with republicans.

    And it's noteworthy to mentioned that the inner city democratic voters supported prop 8 by a larger margin than the republican suburban areas.