- Joined
- Feb 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,299
- Reaction score
- 413
- Location
- Northern Arkansas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Republican disdain for groups like GOProud is one of the reasons I dislike the Republican Party.
And the democratic party disdain for pro-life peoples is one of the reasons I dislike the democratic party. :mrgreen:
And the democratic party disdain for pro-life peoples is one of the reasons I dislike the democratic party. :mrgreen:
interesting observation
on nov 1, there were 39 pro life dems in congress
today, there are 17
Pro-life Democrat voting stats on healthcare bill by Jill Stanek
pro life dems are practically extinct, they were suckerpunched by stupak
plaudits for goproud
I'm not as "pro-life" as most republicans but I certainly see abortion as an area where government intervention is warranted. Personally, I think abortion should be illegal after 30 days but that’s another topic altogether.
I feel we're seeing a hardening of positions by both parties.
I'm not sure just how pro-life most republicans are. I'm of the opinion that there is a great deal of variation in this subject. I'm all for abortion for rape, incest, or the health of the mother. That accounts for something like 1% of all our abortions.
I think our 50 million dead is a sad, sad, commentary on our society. No society can simply kill off so many of it's young without serious consequences. Teachers are trained to view children as resources. We've been far too wasteful. I fear all we've managed to do is damn ourselves.
I can’t say I really disagree with this position. I will add however that I think the only way this issue will ever become less contentious is if both sides agree on a reasonable time frame for when abortions are no longer allowed.
I think the republican party takes too much of an “all or nothing” approach to issues like this. Wouldn’t it be better to save some of the children that are currently being aborted by proposing a reasonable deadline like 30 days?
Ok, just what did good ol' ronnie call it?
tea drinkers generally stay away from abortion, they seem to have more immediate priorities on their minds right now
social issues are still there, but emphasis appears elsewherefor example, 8 red senators went with reid on dadt---burr of north carolina, kirk of illinois, brown of massachusetts, ensign of nevada, voinovich of ohio, murkowski, collins and snowe
the parties are evolving, consequence of and reaction to obama/pelosi economic extremism
plaudits for goproud
Yes and no. You are correct in suggesting the tea partiers are concerned with issues of economics but they are also concerned with teh proper role of the federal government. Others believe the republican party should continue to press the social issues so dear to so many of us at a national level.
I'm of the opinion we should at least attempt to de-nationalize the social issues. I see no reason why the national government or even the supreme court for that matter should be involved in issues such as abortion and gay marriage. I see this as more of an issue that should be left up to the states and their peoples to decide by democratic means. If the peoples of the northeast and west coast want gay marriage and abortion let them have it. Just give the rest of us the same consideration.
Yes and no. You are correct in suggesting the tea partiers are concerned with issues of economics but they are also concerned with teh proper role of the federal government. Others believe the republican party should continue to press the social issues so dear to so many of us at a national level.
I'm of the opinion we should at least attempt to de-nationalize the social issues. I see no reason why the national government or even the supreme court for that matter should be involved in issues such as abortion and gay marriage. I see this as more of an issue that should be left up to the states and their peoples to decide by democratic means. If the peoples of the northeast and west coast want gay marriage and abortion let them have it. Just give the rest of us the same consideration.
That I completely agree with. I believe the same on the abortion issue too. Both issues belong to the states, and not the Federal government.
Yes and no. You are correct in suggesting the tea partiers are concerned with issues of economics but they are also concerned with teh proper role of the federal government. Others believe the republican party should continue to press the social issues so dear to so many of us at a national level.
I'm of the opinion we should at least attempt to de-nationalize the social issues. I see no reason why the national government or even the supreme court for that matter should be involved in issues such as abortion and gay marriage. I see this as more of an issue that should be left up to the states and their peoples to decide by democratic means. If the peoples of the northeast and west coast want gay marriage and abortion let them have it. Just give the rest of us the same consideration.
I suspect you also realize the very real potential for such issues to rip the GOP in two and do not want to see that happen.
Yes and no. You are correct in suggesting the tea partiers are concerned with issues of economics but they are also concerned with teh proper role of the federal government. Others believe the republican party should continue to press the social issues so dear to so many of us at a national level.
I'm of the opinion we should at least attempt to de-nationalize the social issues. I see no reason why the national government or even the supreme court for that matter should be involved in issues such as abortion and gay marriage. I see this as more of an issue that should be left up to the states and their peoples to decide by democratic means. If the peoples of the northeast and west coast want gay marriage and abortion let them have it. Just give the rest of us the same consideration.
Well, then the thing for people like me to do is to abandon lgbt folks to their fate and reestablish solidarity with social conservatives.
I suspect you also realize the very real potential for such issues to rip the GOP in two and do not want to see that happen.
I agree as well but with a caveat:
Should unborn babies have the right to life? If you answer yes doesn’t the federal government have a responsibility to protect that right?
Reagan had his own phrase for gays - American citizens.
Yes and no. You are correct in suggesting the tea partiers are concerned with issues of economics but they are also concerned with teh proper role of the federal government. Others believe the republican party should continue to press the social issues so dear to so many of us at a national level.
I'm of the opinion we should at least attempt to de-nationalize the social issues. I see no reason why the national government or even the supreme court for that matter should be involved in issues such as abortion and gay marriage. I see this as more of an issue that should be left up to the states and their peoples to decide by democratic means. If the peoples of the northeast and west coast want gay marriage and abortion let them have it. Just give the rest of us the same consideration.
Jesus also made a whip and chased merchants out of the temple, because they had turned a sacred place into a market.
Not to mention that he says that when he comes back, it will be to dish out judgment against everyone who isn't a Christian. In addition, he advised his disciples to arm themselves.
What a joke, when it becomes legal, EVERYONE gets their way and nothing is FORCED on you, you will still be free to not like it, think its a sin, think its gross, or whatever YOU want.
“I have an easier time being openly gay with conservatives than I do being a conservative with other gay people.”
Video: GOProud chief defends conservatism from MSNBC tool « Hot Air
hey, it's OBAMA'S doj that compared gay marriage to incest and having relations with a teenager
tony west was responsible
Paul Hogarth: Obama's DOMA Defense Unacceptable
do you know mr west?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?