If Republicans Were All For Gay Marriage, Would You Vote For Them?

  • Joeyphx444

    Posts: 2382

    Mar 19, 2013 5:59 AM GMT
    Would you?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 6:08 AM GMT
    Well, the point is most of them are NOT. And many have gone to extreme lengths to try to eradicate gay marriage via a constitutional amendment proposed by the George W. Bush administration.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 6:14 AM GMT
    lagwm saidWell, the point is most of them are NOT. And many have gone to extreme lengths to try to eradicate gay marriage via a constitutional amendment proposed by the George W. Bush administration.

    ..That's not what the OP asked..
    Waiting for that revolutionary republican..then yes!..Gay marriage is a selling point but hardly the basis of my overall decision ..
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Mar 19, 2013 6:29 AM GMT
    No. Why the hell would I vote for a party whose real interest lies with banks, oil companies and big business, who have no concern for people who are not of the elite, except to use as cheap labor.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 6:32 AM GMT
    Joeyphx444 saidWould you?


    I have for four decades and would regardless.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 6:42 AM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    Joeyphx444 saidWould you?


    I have for four decades and would regardless.
    By your own (gleeful) admission here on RJ you voted for Rick Santorum.

    Rick Santorum, an opponent of LGBT rights in general, has said that he has "a problem with homosexual acts" and does not believe the right to privacy under the United States Constitution covers sexual acts, and also criticized the US Supreme Court ruling in the case of Lawrence v. Texas that ruled to the contrary. Santorum has also stated that the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy, which ended in 2011, should be reinstated and has voiced his opposition of same-sex parenting.

    Need I say more?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 6:56 AM GMT
    YES(only if i were a citizen)
    i would endorse them like my abs & uncut penis
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 8:04 AM GMT
    Vote Republican anyway so Barack Hussein Obama's BFFs don't stay in power
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 12:08 PM GMT
    lagwm said
    freedomisntfree said
    Joeyphx444 saidWould you?


    I have for four decades and would regardless.
    By your own (gleeful) admission here on RJ you voted for Rick Santorum.

    Rick Santorum, an opponent of LGBT rights in general, has said that he has "a problem with homosexual acts" and does not believe the right to privacy under the United States Constitution covers sexual acts, and also criticized the US Supreme Court ruling in the case of Lawrence v. Texas that ruled to the contrary. Santorum has also stated that the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy, which ended in 2011, should be reinstated and has voiced his opposition of same-sex parenting.

    Need I say more?


    Yes

    Santorum was my first 'choice' and Gingrich my second and then Romney 3rd. Of course my real goal was an open convention and start over with someone else other than the choices we had. Had he been elected I think Romney would have done fine.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 2:17 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidNo. Why the hell would I vote for a party whose real interest lies with banks, oil companies and big business, who have no concern for people who are not of the elite, except to use as cheap labor.


    Pretty much this. Gay marriage is not as important as the issues above, so removing it from the equation has no effect on where I stand politically, since I've always been a diehard democrat across the board.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 2:26 PM GMT
    For me it's not only a matter of gay rights, but the systematic disenfranchisement of the American people. While the rich live rather well in commodious homes bedizened with vulgar finery, the middle class lays beleaguered. The poor bedraggled by the economic crisis has no hope to ever even attain lower middle class status. It's almost as if we're not a nation of CLASSES, but rather CASTES. This is not to say that the Democrats are perfect to. In fact, it's not an indictment on the entire Republican Party either. However, the facts remain that the overarching (individuals vary of course) Republican Party line is such that does not favor minorities, the poor, and women...something that goes against the idealized values of the USA.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 2:43 PM GMT
    TallNYguy said
    AMoonHawk saidNo. Why the hell would I vote for a party whose real interest lies with banks, oil companies and big business, who have no concern for people who are not of the elite, except to use as cheap labor.


    Pretty much this. Gay marriage is not as important as the issues above, so removing it from the equation has no effect on where I stand politically, since I've always been a diehard democrat across the board.

    +1
    +1

    I was a diehard Republican, not surprising since both my late parents were Republican officeholders. I used to help them campaign.

    But when I moved away from their home & influence I began to evaluate things on my own. And I saw that the Republican Party is indeed the political arm of corporations and financial interests, with policies & positions hostile to ordinary working citizens. It is also the party of bigotry & prejudice, not merely against gays, but all minorities, as well as against women.

    So if Republicans suddenly supported gay marriage they would still be wrong on too many other issues for me to vote for them. I might also address the issue that some raise, when they say their own Republican elected representative is a good guy, and not the typical Republican bigot.

    The problem with that view is that voting for any Republican, even a virtual saint, gives the bad Republicans legislative majorities. And it's the bad Republicans who call the shots in their party (look at the recent CPAC hatefest), and pressure all Republicans office holders to vote in lockstep with the leadership. Republicans didn't earn the title "The Party of No" by accident.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 2:45 PM GMT
    f......ck NOOO
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 2:55 PM GMT
    Of course not.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 2:57 PM GMT
    Nope
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 3:00 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidNo. Why the hell would I vote for a party whose real interest lies with banks, oil companies and big business, who have no concern for people who are not of the elite, except to use as cheap labor.


    my feelings exactly!! The GOP is the new Know Nothing Party for the 21st century
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 3:09 PM GMT
    some of us are already voting for Republicans now
  • reptile18

    Posts: 199

    Mar 19, 2013 3:10 PM GMT
    Maybe if I was rich, white, Christian, heterosexual, and had no compassion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 3:11 PM GMT
    jerseywoof saidsome of us are already voting for Republicans now


    Perhaps the biggest dealbreaker.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 3:11 PM GMT
    No, and if they do, neither would most republicans over 30, so I don't think we have to worry about it
  • slimnmuscly

    Posts: 541

    Mar 19, 2013 3:12 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidNo. Why the hell would I vote for a party whose real interest lies with banks, oil companies and big business, who have no concern for people who are not of the elite, except to use as cheap labor.


    Because the Republican Party is even worse -- that's why.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 3:13 PM GMT
    I dated a Republican once less to say they don't actually care about humans just money...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 3:16 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidNo. Why the hell would I vote for a party whose real interest lies with banks, oil companies and big business, who have no concern for people who are not of the elite, except to use as cheap labor.


    I'd rather vote for a Democrat who is in bed with mega-farms, the ethanol lobby, banks, and making it easy to send jobs to Mexico or overseas.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 3:19 PM GMT
    TallNYguy said
    jerseywoof saidsome of us are already voting for Republicans now


    Perhaps the biggest dealbreaker.


    you would be surprised at how many gay republicans I know, there are more out there than you might think
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 19, 2013 3:20 PM GMT
    Joeyphx444 saidWould you?


    If it meant that a Republic candidate didn't have a record of spouting anti-homosexual hatred. Gay Marriage is the flagship right that people use as a barometer to say you support gays or you do not. I'd rather have a Republican say marriage is for states while privately supporting gay rights and bringing that support to the level of government he exists in than a Republican who is for gay marriage but hates gays.

    Both of those last ones are better than Rick Santorum though.