Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Forum puts Democrats in hot seat over gay issues


Zguy28

Recommended Posts

Really? I thought homosexuals were some kind of potted plant.

:laugh:

Maybe O'bama, Edwards, and Hillary should plant a smooch on each other to show how pro "gay" they are.

Opps... hillarys a woman. :doh:

That was the stupidest post I've read all week.

lol I take it you havent read the "Bash Bros" thread in the Stadium:silly:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me it is sad that the Democratic candidates still have to pander to fear. I seriously doubt any of them are really against Gay Marriage, but their campaign managers probably told them that the same voters who might possibly vote for them because of the war, will just stay home if they support gay marriage.

Everything these days is about electibility. It is sick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything these days is about electibility. It is sick.

This I agree with...Why can't someone running simply say these are my beliefs and what I feel is important to work towards.

You can't get a straight answer out of any of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This I agree with...Why can't someone running simply say these are my beliefs and what I feel is important to work towards.

You can't get a straight answer out of any of them.

Because experience has shown that:

  • Negative advertising works better them positive advertising.
  • If you mutter carefully-phrases platitudes, a lot of people will think you agree with them. Every time you actually commit yourself to a position, you lose votes.

That's why the ideal candidate right now is a complete unknown, preferably with name and face recognition. Somebody who people think they like (despite knowing nothing real about him.)

I think the best examples are Ahnold and Fred Thompson, although Ross Perot and Colin Powell (when people thought he was a Presidential candidate) are good examples, too. Everybody assumed that those people agreed with them.

(A similar effect: I've been told that 60-70% of the voters think it would be a good idea to scrap the Constitution and write a new one. I understand that this has been true for the last 30 years. One reason why I think so many people feel that way, is because they all assume that the new Constitution will be written "their way".)

(It's also, IMO, a reason why I'm real glad we don't live in a Democracy.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This I agree with...Why can't someone running simply say these are my beliefs and what I feel is important to work towards.

You can't get a straight answer out of any of them.

Hell, the only candidate who's honest-Ron Paul-sadly has very little chance :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really hard for democrats to take a stand for what they really believe in, becuase they have to appear middle of the road to the majority of people who will vote for them.

If they came out on this program and really said what they wanted to, alot of people who would have voted for them probably wouldn't.

Concerning gay marriage, I really dislike when they compare themselves to minorities. They are not born that way they choose it. Until it is proven otherwise, I don't think this issue will get going with the American public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Concerning gay marriage, I really dislike when they compare themselves to minorities. They are not born that way they choose it. Until it is proven otherwise, I don't think this issue will get going with the American public.

:doh: :doh:

I have a question for the Gay community:

Why can't you be happy with Civil Unions? Why the need for you to call it marriage? If Equal Protection is your platform, Civil Unions should be sufficient.

Honest question.

Why not? Really, if they want to call it marriage why should anyone else care? Why not say 'we'll humor them and call it marriage, but we know it's really not'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Concerning gay marriage, I really dislike when they compare themselves to minorities. They are not born that way they choose it.

The only way you can know this for sure is by personal experience. :D

But even then your sample would be too small to extrapolate to the entire gay population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:doh: :doh:

Why not? Really, if they want to call it marriage why should anyone else care? Why not say 'we'll humor them and call it marriage, but we know it's really not'?

If it a civil union affords them equal protection under the law... it seems to me that there push to have it called marriage is simply obstanance, stubborness, and arrogance. To your point... what's the difference? Why should it matter to them? It's just a word, right?

Why do they have to force the issue?

....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it a civil union affords them civil protection under the law... it seems to me that there push to have it called marriage is simply obstanance, stubborness, and arrogance. To your point... what's the difference? Why should it matter to them? It's just a word, right?

Why do they have to force the issue?

....

I could ask the same exact questions. Marriage has a much stronger conatation (damn, I can never remember how to spell that word and the 3 manhattans aren't helping) and we both know it. I just don't get why the religious people just can't let this one go. Just think 'well, we know they aren't really married' in your bigoted little hearts and it's all good. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Civil unions are guaranteed not to be the same as marriage, for several reasons:

  • For the same reason marriage won't be the same as marriage, if the GOP has their way. For example, that's why they recently passed a federal law declaring that even if a state choses to grant same-sex marriages, the federal government won't recognize it, anyway.
  • Because your "separate but [un]equal" plan would have a different name than "marriage", that would also mean that, in order to have equality, they'd have to force every existing contract, law, and corporate policy to recognize it, too. (Which is one of the reason bigots like the idea: It's guaranteed never to be equal. And it changes the battleground from an area which they're getting close to losing, into millions of individual battlegrounds, where they can continue to discriminate for decades.)
  • For the inherent reason that separate isn't equal. Same reason people weren't satisfied when there was a "colored" drinking fountain next to the "white only" one. Same reason they weren't satisfied to just go to black schools. Even if the black schools were "just as good as white", the mere act that they're separate makes it discrimination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could ask the same exact questions. Marriage has a much stronger conatation (damn, I can never remember how to spell that word and the 3 manhattans aren't helping) and we both know it. I just don't get why the religious people just can't let this one go. Just think 'well, we know they aren't really married' in your bigoted little hearts and it's all good. :)

Well I think the American Public, by and large, has been fairly amicable on this issue.

It seems like a fair compromise. But the gay community, acting like a spoiled child, refuses to even accept that. They've got to have it their way.

Hey... if a gay couple wanna go around telling people they're married... and on paper, they have all the same rights... WTF do they have a problem with? You've got your equal protection, now kindly :stfu: and stop acting like a child. This country was built on compromise... you, as a gay person, are not special, you are not the exception. The world DOES NOT revolve around you. I know it's hard for you to come out of your self-absorbed world to actually consider that some folks might fundamentally disagree with you but would be willing to be the bigger person and meet you halfway... but try.

Because someone else disagrees with you does not automatically make them wrong. And it certainly doesn't make them a bigot, nor does it make them homophobic. Of course, for the ego-centric and small minded, they can't see it any other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...