Yahoo News: Republicans Cindy and Meghan McCain Support Gay Marriage Movement

[Ellis]

I snooped thru a few pages of the TG and search was not working (?)...

Anyway... It's encouraging to see some Republicans living in the 21st Century.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_cindy_mccain_gay_marriage;_ylt=A0wNdPfvLVhLz2kAzTas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTQwM2NmN24zBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwMTIxL3VzX2NpbmR5X21jY2Fpbl9nYXlfbWFycmlhZ2UEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwM0BHBvcwMxBHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5faGVhZGxpbmVfbGlzdARzbGsDbWNjYWluc3dpZmVk

[twa]

Go tell it to O ...tell him Cheney said WTF?

[Ax]

She also supported Obama not being elected.

Her opinion matters to you now because?

[ACW]

Good for them.

Not surprised about Meghan. She's the more socially libertarian Repub the Repubs need.

[Predicto]

This is nice, but it would have been useful BEFORE the Prop 8 vote. It's kind of an empty gesture now.

[DRSmith]

Wasn't prop 8 at the same time as the election?

[sacase]

Funny thing about the gay marriage issues is it seems like the more gays push it, the more state bans that are being enacted.

[NOLASKINSFAN]

OT: but the tape over the mouth thing is lame, I know some conservative group that do that as well.

[Veretax]

People are entitled to their opinions. Just because someone with some affluence believes something doesn't mean everyone in the country does.

[ACW]

People are entitled to their opinions. Just because someone with some affluence believes something doesn't mean everyone in the country does.

Nope, but it doesn't make it wrong OR right. For example, I'm sure affluent people support marriage apartheid (thank you RRND for that). Doesn't make it right.

[Burgold]

Nope, but it doesn't make it wrong OR right. For example, I'm sure affluent people support marriage apartheid (thank you RRND for that). Doesn't make it right.

Heck, in South Africa many affluent people supported Apartheid. Affluent people often support stuff that isn't right.

[wantarace17]

Megan is hot

[DRSmith]

Funny thing about the gay marriage issues is it seems like the more gays push it, the more state bans that are being enacted.

Yeah well then the supreme court can decide that.

[TheGreatBuzz]

I'm not going to voice my opinion on gay marrage because I don't wan't it to taint my argument. How about this idea....

Take government out of marrage. No need for the courthouse. No tax benefit. Government couldn't care less. If you want to have some kind of ceremony to announce your love for another person, good for you. But there is no legal benefit or down side to being married. Would that make both sides happy?

[DRSmith]

I'm not going to voice my opinion on gay marrage because I don't wan't it to taint my argument. How about this idea....

Take government out of marrage. No need for the courthouse. No tax benefit. Government couldn't care less. If you want to have some kind of ceremony to announce your love for another person, good for you. But there is no legal benefit or down side to being married. Would that make both sides happy?

Or everyone gets the civil unions and benefits and the religous people can go to chuch and get their religous ceremonies after.

[TheGreatBuzz]

Or everyone gets the civil unions and benefits and the religous people can go to chuch and get their religous ceremonies after.

Something like that....I'm not going to say I have all the details figured out but isn't marriage historically a religious thing? why is the government even involved?

[twa]

Or everyone gets the civil unions and benefits and the religous people can go to chuch and get their religous ceremonies after.

This :cool:...but along with the benefits comes the liabilities

[DRSmith]

Something like that....I'm not going to say I have all the details figured out but isn't marriage historically a religious thing? why is the government even involved?

Because once the government starts deciding to give tax benefits or tax breaks and or even pays for things they can have a say.

That is why churches are also suppose to stay neuteral or lose their 501 3c status.

[DRSmith]

This :cool:...but along with the benefits comes the liabilities

Well the liability should be incured you enter into a contract and decide to break it you have to fulfill legal and monetary obiligations made.

[ACW]

I'm not going to voice my opinion on gay marrage because I don't wan't it to taint my argument. How about this idea....

Take government out of marrage. No need for the courthouse. No tax benefit. Government couldn't care less. If you want to have some kind of ceremony to announce your love for another person, good for you. But there is no legal benefit or down side to being married. Would that make both sides happy?

Or everyone gets the civil unions and benefits and the religous people can go to chuch and get their religous ceremonies after.

Makes too much sense :mad:

[TheGreatBuzz]

Because once the government starts deciding to give tax benefits or tax breaks and or even pays for things they can have a say.

That is why churches are also suppose to stay neuteral or lose their 501 3c status.

I don't know much about the church thing but in my plan the government stays out of it. So they don't give benefits or pay for anything. Then they can stay out of it.

[DRSmith]

I don't know much about the church thing but in my plan the government stays out of it. So they don't give benefits or pay for anything. Then they can stay out of it.

It benefits the government and a country as a whole to have people get married provide stable enviroments and have children. That is why they do it.

[TheGreatBuzz]

It benefits the government and a country as a whole to have people get married provide stable enviroments and have children. That is why they do it.

That's crap....half of all marriages end in divorce. Maybe at one time your statement was true but I think that time has passed.

[DRSmith]

That's crap....half of all marriages end in divorce. Maybe at one time your statement was true but I think that time has passed.

Yes those people get together create wealth together and children then they split up and start over creating more wealth so there is a benefit to it, plus they help create and industry.

[TheGreatBuzz]

Yes those people get together create wealth together and children then they split up and start over creating more wealth so there is a benefit to it, plus they help create and industry.

And explain to me how the government sponsoring it makes it different then if it was done without government involvement?