• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

George H.W. Bush serves as witness at same-sex wedding (1 Viewer)

Why wouldn't either be ok? :confused:
 
"to do a gay wedding" = officiating a wedding.

GHWB attended a wedding, and signed the paper as a witness.

While the subject matter is the same, that's two very different things. Also, what capacity does GHWB have currently that can affect the legality of laws? I imagine that would be why some were complaining about RBG's participation.

I suspect if RBG opened a medical marijuana dispensery, there probably would be issues with that too.
 
"to do a gay wedding" = officiating a wedding.

GHWB attended a wedding, and signed the paper as a witness.

While the subject matter is the same, that's two very different things. Also, what capacity does GHWB have currently that can affect the legality of laws? I imagine that would be why some were complaining about RBG's participation.

He did sign as a witness. Other than that, you have a point, but he is legally tied to it. He doesn't look too good in the pictures...
 
He did sign as a witness. Other than that, you have a point, but he is legally tied to it. He doesn't look too good in the pictures...

Why? Who cares? Other than snarky little libs that want to use it for propaganda that is.
 
Anyway, what about an ex-President

I don't see anything wrong with it, but then I don't see anything wrong with a judge LEGALLY marrying two same sex people either.
 
So, he was a witness at a wedding of two longtime friends. Good for him.

That matters to anyone outside of the wedding party, how again?
 
Why? Who cares? Other than snarky little libs that want to use it for propaganda that is.

Of course we're supposed to care that someone Obama knew in High School committed a crime...
 
I get that Justice RBG's officiation is different. But I still don't get why anyone would think that's a problem.
 
Wait i thought ALL republicans are anti-gay?

guess not


as to the OP, ANYBODY that has a problem with someone being a witness to a legal marriage or a judge conducting a legal marriage is actually the ONLY one with the problem. Nobody cares what losers like that think.
 
Wait i thought ALL republicans are anti-gay?

guess not


as to the OP, ANYBODY that has a problem with someone being a witness to a legal marriage or a judge conducting a legal marriage is actually the ONLY one with the problem. Nobody cares what losers like that think.

Ghw Bush is a republican???? MORE OF A GLOBALIST Progressive if you ask me.
 
Ghw Bush is a republican???? MORE OF A GLOBALIST Progressive if you ask me.

he is what ever he claims to be, we dont get to determine that
 
IMO, it was a political motivated move.
Reason? Gay marriage will take top discussion in the upcoming election. George W. Bush, opposed same-sex marriage and in 2004 announced his support for a proposed constitutional amendment to outlaw it. So daddy (with mommy) shows up as a witness at a gay marriage to send out the message that not all Bush's think alike. Even Jeb Bush who agreed with his brother George once upon a time is now making claim we should be more tolerant of other types of marriages and that they should be decided in the states. Daddy Bush is just softening it up a bit for little Jeb.
 
Just further proof that H.W. Bush isn't anywhere near to being a Conservative. Not really all that surprising, so far as I'm concerned.
 
I think that this sort of thing shows that most politicians, on either side of the aisle, aren't really so rabid about a lot of the social issues. Probably most of congress doesn't care about things like gay rights one way or the other. But their voters do. On one hand, it's a little nice to see that these elected (or former elected) leaders really do have some decent morality, but then it's saddening to see that they have to cater to a large enough demographic of bigots to affect policy.

See the above bigot and other examples of H. W. Bush being subject to "no true scotsman" attacks, for example.
 
Or maybe they are just friends with the couple.

Maybe, but one could be in attendance of such an occasion and still not be an official witness to it. The motivation behind this IMO goes deeper than what you suggest. Users and makers........movers and shakers
 
Maybe, but one could be in attendance of such an occasion and still not be an official witness to it. The motivation behind this IMO goes deeper than what you suggest. Users and makers........movers and shakers

Yeah you're probably right it is all contrived and they probably got their orders from illuminati HQ.
 
Yeah you're probably right it is all contrived and they probably got their orders from illuminati HQ.

Maybe I am a bit cynical but after reading analysis on Karl Rove's playbook on how to run a winning campaign I see the same plays happening within the Republican establishment going on right now. Much of winning the nomination is through perceptions and mind games long before the horse race begins. Heck Rove, a part of the Republican establishment, is still using the same tactics against Conservatives and Libertarians within the Republican party. One example in his playbook is to attack your opponent over his strengths to put him on defense. We seen that happen the last couple of weeks play out in the Senate over the health care bill.
 
I think that this sort of thing shows that most politicians, on either side of the aisle, aren't really so rabid about a lot of the social issues. Probably most of congress doesn't care about things like gay rights one way or the other. But their voters do. On one hand, it's a little nice to see that these elected (or former elected) leaders really do have some decent morality, but then it's saddening to see that they have to cater to a large enough demographic of bigots to affect policy.

Which is exactly why it is so refreshing on the very rare occasion that I find a politician I can actually vote for.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom