Comments on: Give Up The Losing Fight On Gay Rights, Gop

By: denyvctor

denyvctor — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 11:10:15 +0000

I think we need to stop pointing fingers that create more divisiveness amongst disenfranchised communities.
http://ezinearticles.com/?Premium-White-Pro-Review—Does-Free-Trial-Really-Work?&id=3205919

By: BobN

BobN — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:55:58 +0000

“I’m tired of gay people thinking that marriage is all about them.” I’m tired of straight people thinking that marriage is all about them.

By: BobN

BobN — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:54:51 +0000

“Bob, you are not going to get any sympathy from me.” Not looking for sympathy. Just honesty. You said we lost nothing.

By: Pincher Martin

Pincher Martin — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:26:24 +0000

“I lost the right to marry my partner. We don’t meet the cohabitation requirement of Domestic Partnership right now. Been together for 28 years. Work keeps us in different cities sometimes. Straight folks in the same situation? No problemo.”
************************************************************************* Bob, you are not going to get any sympathy from me. I’m married to an immigrant. We have to jump through hoops that other straight people don’t have to jump through. Life isn’t fair sometimes. Deal with it. The rules and customs often have their reasons for being, even if you don’t agree with them. I’m tired of gay people thinking that marriage is all about them.

By: Pincher Martin

Pincher Martin — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:22:42 +0000

“What is the status quo of the GOP vis-a-vis gay rights? You don’t know, apparently, since you seem to support civil unions. That would put you in a tiny minority in the GOP. ”
*************************************************************************

I support a federalist approach to these issues. If gays can convince a state’s voters that they deserve marriage, domestic partnerships, or whatever, then so be it. If not, then not. And the courts should stay out of it. Since so many of you are convinced of the ultimate victory of your views, I don’t see why that should be too heavy a cross to bear. And telling you what we shouldn’t do *is* articulating a policy.

By: BobN

BobN — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:13:18 +0000

Pincher: What is the status quo of the GOP vis-a-vis gay rights? You don’t know, apparently, since you seem to support civil unions. That would put you in a tiny minority in the GOP. My point continues to be that the GOP needs to articulate a position about what gay people SHOULD do. I keep asking you what that policy might be and all you do is tell me what we shouldn’t do. And, as for this “And all over an issue which didn’t diminish their rights in the slightest.” I lost the right to marry my partner. We don’t meet the cohabitation requirement of Domestic Partnership right now. Been together for 28 years. Work keeps us in different cities sometimes. Straight folks in the same situation? No problemo.

By: Pincher Martin

Pincher Martin — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:58:02 +0000

“With no intention of offense or condescension, I will say that your position is consistent, but is one where the ground is slumping out from under you, even in your own “not-on-the-coasts” region.”
*************************************************************************

So you say, but I’m guessing you don’t mix nearly as well as you think you do. Every time we hold an election on these issues, the conservative side wins. In the last election, the blue states of California and Florida both voted against gay marriage. Even among whites in California, Prop 8 lost by just 49-51 — which means the proposition was more popular among the state’s white voters than was McCain. Florida went more than sixty percent in favor of changing the state’s constitution. Arizona also voted for marriage to be between a man and a woman. And Arkansas voted to ban adoptions by gays. It is only when gay rights advocates appeal to the courts that they have a chance on this issue because they clearly can’t win an election on it.

By: buzzricksons

buzzricksons — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:48:05 +0000

Pincher “Loaves and Fishes” Martin: Kultur Warrior. I admire your steadfastness, hombre. I travel the interior quite a bit by car myself, and always enjoy the people I meet there (I’m a midwesterner myself). With no intention of offense or condescension, I will say that your position is consistent, but is one where the ground is slumping out from under you, even in your own “not-on-the-coasts” region. There’s always going to be very red, and very blue places. What struck me over Labor Day weekend was finding fairly mellow attitudes about much of this stuff: the people out there don’t care as much as the politicians want them to about this culture war business. That’s why the parties always have to drum it up — it’s something that appears to distinguish two pork-addicted parties, divides the electorate against one another so they don’t turn on their leaders, and is a surefire moneyraiser for party organizations. That does not mean that it is right, and certainly does not mean it is a reflection of how people feel if left to their own experience and judgment on these issues. It should be something we are trying to get away from – at least in appearance if nothing else (consider how effective the other side has been (2008) and will be in doing so, which will only make the contrast that much greater). The game has already changed; how does the GOP get into the new game while remaining true to its principles is the question.

By: Pincher Martin

Pincher Martin — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:43:21 +0000

“Isn’t “conservatism” supposed to be a “live and let live” – “keep the government out of our lives as much as possible” type of thing?”
************************************************************************* You’re mistaking libertarianism for conservatism. Modern American conservatism is about nationalism, strong social values, and small government.

By: buzzricksons

buzzricksons — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:40:55 +0000

Isn’t “conservatism” supposed to be a “live and let live” – “keep the government out of our lives as much as possible” type of thing? Isn’t that what we’re supposed to be conserving about the American experience? If so, how does getting on a high horse to have the government come and interfere with what someone else is doing at no cost or injury to oneself or one’s family figure into that equation?