Just thought I would be the first to announce the overwhelming passage of Prop 210, I believe? That stops the Velvet Mafia from continuing their march to trivialize the family and to cheapen the concept of marriage. Just goes to show, the socialists can't get their ideas implemented through the ballot box, they need degenerates like Justice Ginsburg and the 9th circuit court of appeals to force their moral depravity down our throats. Hooray for morals.
Prop. 2, actually.
I'm conservative, my wife is conservative, all of my friends are conservative. We all voted against it.
True conservatives are for freedom. Religous zealots are for a Christian America.
How come there aren't more Republicans like you doogie? I tend to agree with the Republicans on economic issues, but the social agenda has indeed been taken over by religious zealots.
I don't know. I really spend too much time thinking about this, but not coming up with any answers.
I grew up Methodist in Central Texas, which boils down to "Read the Bible and decide what you think about it. Oh, and don't be late for Sunday night's softball game". Methodists were great because they were always home in time for the Cowboys kickoff. None of the people I sat in church with on Sunday wanted to impose their beliefs (other than on abortion)on anyone.
Now I just don't know. I think after Lee Atwater died, the Republican party took the easy/short-term view of appealling to the Christian conservatives who weren't really catered to until then(even Nancy Reagan bought into the very un-Christian belief of astrology). This served the purpose of setting up clear lines of demarcation between Democrats and Republicans on many "moral" issues, thereby ensuring the Christian conservative vote. In the long run though, this has turned a lot of TRUE conservatives (and by that I mean people driven by common sense instead of their interpretation of the bible) away from the party.
No third party is the answer. If the Republicans would just swing back to commonsense instead of voodoo, they could probaly kill the Democratic party. As much as I once feared McCain, I think he might be the ultimate answer.
Wait, was prop 2 the one on gay marriage?
Why is that an issue for socialists? It has nothing to do with economics?
You lie doogie, the Libertarian Party is great, bazookas for all.
I actually am a libertarian, you gotta love Badnarik. Of course I live in Australia and we don't have a libertarian party (well there is but it's only active in one state. So I'm a member of the liberal party (broadly correlative with the republican party).
I think if I lived in america my vote could be Lib, Rep, or Dem depending on where I was and the individual candidates. I didn't like Bush or Kerry last election.
McCain seems good but I get the feeling that his time has passed. It's hard to get into US politics over here so I'm not sure if that is right.
Amen to that doogie. I personally couldn't giva a shit if homosexuals wanted to get married of not. This has definately caused some serious discusions with some of the more religious republicans and myself.
Religious zealots make me want to bang my head against the wall for an hour.
That is cool. But how many conservatives think that way?
I too, say Thank You.
regardless of my personal stance on homosexuals, I find it extremely funny that the first people who want to yell "racist!" at people and accuse them of such things are quite clearly being allowed to discriminate against gays.
Shame on us for standing by and allowing it to happen.
Methodists were great because they were always home in time for the Cowboys kickoff.
Reminds me of the synagogue I got dragged to as a kid. Come hell or high water, the service ended in exactly an hour.
And I'm with you on McCain; he might be the only true T-Man in Washington. I'd vote for him in a second.
Gay marriage? Well, from what the polls say, and from the attitudes of the students I teach, this debate will most likely be over in a few years. The generation coming up is overwhelmingly in favor it, and we can put archaic, hateful attitudes such as the one shown by the original poster in the garbage.
In another "Yeah, doogie" post: Indeed, a lot of conservatives spend way too much time worrying about what other people are doing. What happened to small government, personal freedom, and low taxes? That's what I'm talkin' 'bout.
Small government? Conservatives want less government intervention? When was this magical era?
They were called the Reagan Years.
I voted against Prop 2 as well. Your description is one of the things that has pushed me more and more to the left. Instead of voting for my beliefs, I now feel I have to vote against the zealots.
For all of those that claim to be conservative and feel that Prop. 2 would be infringing on our freedom, I really don't see how banning marriage between Man and Man is somehow infringing on the freedom of sodomites. I would appreciate a little clarification on this claim. I don't have a problem with queers, they can go and sodomize all they want, but we don't have to have it shoved down our throats by allowing them to take part in a union that is specifically reserved for the use in between men and women. Explain it to me, I want to know how you can to that conclusion. Thanks
Can we just refer to the approximately 5000 previous gay marriage threads rather than rehash all that's already been said on this topic?
Doogie, I disagree with most of your posts, and we'll never agree on abortion on any level, but I just wanted to tell you what a great post this was and that I wish more people felt this way. Maybe the pendulem is about to swing back towards the middle again, who knows?
I agree with this 100%. In fact I remember that what pushed me initially towards the left was Bush 41 adopting the Ralph Reed/Morally Majority platform just before the Republican convention in '92. I voted for Reagan twice and Bush once but I decided then to vote for Clinton, not so much as a vote for the Democrat candidate as a vote against the religious zealots.
Prop 2 passed by a margin of 77-23. Say what you want about why people voted the way they did. Call 77% of the people that voted against gay marraige all the names you want.
The fact of the matter is the people were allowed to speak. That is democracy at its finest. Rather than have an activist judge impose his will on the state, the people were asked to speak and they did.
You can argue the outcome, but you cannot argue against the fact that the peoples' voices were allowed to be heard.
If you disagree with the fact that 3/4 of the state were against gay marraige - then quit bitching and work to change their minds. Relying on an activit judiciary has made the minority fat and lazy.