Kids of Republicans pull parents to the left on gay marriage

[CountryClassSF]

So, Mr. Salmon is lying to voters about his position on marriage. That's how I took this.

This is the way the establishment GOP treats us. Make no mistake, no one wants SSM imposed on America more than the GOP.

"Evolved" "privately" - so he tells voters one thing, tells his son the other.

Congress should serve the people, not just their family. My parents support SSM, and I don't.  I wouldn't expect them to form their opinions on it based on my views.

[CountryClassSF]

SSM is the great human catastrophe of our lifetime. The elephant of inequality is sitting in the middle of the room, but people are too self-hating, uneducated, and apathetic to see it.

Half of the country has conferred upon itself a title of nobility, and subsequently helped themselves to whatever they please. Allowing gays to exercise the same right is not a solution to anything.

We are merely keeping with our long-standing American tradition of expanding the problem.

I do not like SSM but I don't think I would be comfortable taking it away from people once it's granted.

[CountryClassSF]

Torie, Congressman Gibson got elected in your district before he supported SSM.  I'm not saying your district is anti-SSM, but maybe it's not the #1 issue for people on either side - most people vote on jobs. And by the way, I am a big fan of his -- he's an American patriot and an overall wonderful man.

Now, please do what you can to make sure that carpetbagger Democrat who ran last time move back to NYC ... hopefully retain the seat next cycle

[CountryClassSF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Unfortunately people aren't going to change their minds on this.  I just wish more supporters of SSM would understand the vast majority of opposition isn't based on hatred. And I wish more Log Cabin Republicans would stand up for people like Baronelle Stutzman and Sweet Cakes by Melissa.

We can disagree on the definition of marriage but still stand up for religious freedom.  That's what I wish moderates and conservatives can come together on. But unfortunately many are fully aligned with the left.

[CountryClassSF]

For the love of Jesus Christ, his mother Mary, and the earthly father Joseph just admit you don't like gays Aggregate Demand!  Nobody is buying this verbose bullshit of yours that you simply don't like the expansion of government power, "it's all a conspiracy against singles" blah blah blah blah arguments.  It is obvious to anyone over a fifth grade reading level and an IQ above room temperature that you just don't like gay marriage and are coming up with every half baked argument in the book to argue why it's not a good thing while trying to sound as non-bigoted as possible.

Do you really believe it's not possible to not believe a same-sex relationship is a marriage and not harbor any ill will towards gay people?

[CountryClassSF]

If there's a "constitutional right" to marry anyone you want though, that's a slippery slope.  That is why I cannot understand why people can't support SSM without believing its a constitutionally guaranteed protection.

[CountryClassSF]

If there's a "constitutional right" to marry anyone you want though, that's a slippery slope.  That is why I cannot understand why people can't support SSM without believing its a constitutionally guaranteed protection.

That's a different point. Indeed, many people support SSM without necessarily believing it is a Constitutional right. I wrestle with that issue myself, and at this point, focus on the right to travel issue. It is rather heavy lifting to find that the meaning of  the Constitution has evolved based on societal evolution on this particular issue, but the right to travel is rather well settled precedent now, although obviously not previously applied to this issue, but then the issue has only arisen as some states have legalized SSM, some having indeed done it by statute rather than judicial fiat to boot.

That I can understand.  If the court legalizes it federally under the situation where with DOMA being struck down, out-of-state marriages being recognized but in-state not creates an equal protection issue.

And I do know that some conservatives and libertarians support this view, but it doesn't get media coverage.

My prayer and hope is that there can be understanding amongst gay Republicans and others that opposition to SSM is not based on hatred.

And that  people can distinguish between individual discrimination vs ceremonial discrimination when it comes to service businesses

[CountryClassSF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Can you explain your position? I'm apt to defend it and probably agree with you but I haven't understood your points

[CountryClassSF]

I Just wish people could be a little more respectful.  When I was involved in gay-straight alliance in my high school (over a decade ago now! I'm ancient!), we focused on respect for people who are different. We focused on fostering an environment where no one is to be bullied. Now, we're seeing Christians being bullied -- or even gays who dissent being bullied (like the guys who met with Cruz).   That's frightening to me, and the main reason why I do not believe marriage should be redefined

[CountryClassSF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And I won't.  But it's not that simple. Once SSM is imposed, why can't the battle then be declared over for the gay activists?  Why do the rest of us have to be forced to approve of or have it in our faces?

[CountryClassSF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's on my face on TV, on the streets, in public spaces where any opposition expressed you run the risk of losing/not getting your job, being boycotted, or even receiving threats. The collectivists have created an environment where bullying is acceptable, just as long as its the Christians and gays w/ unorthodox views being ostracized and propagandized.

[CountryClassSF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No. But you had to mention it, so it is now.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, but you felt the need to mention it.

I'm talking about media portrayal, portrayals of opposition, and the intimidation factor

[CountryClassSF]

I am hurt by this subject and it is all I will say. The flaunting  life of some is something I am uncomfortable with

[CountryClassSF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We both know that is 100% different. There is a difference between doing it for this, and doing it for social status and media coverage and hurting Christians.

[CountryClassSF]

I have seen many  openly admit that they are all about making Christians feel hurt.  Our happiness and our feelings and our equality are meaningless

[CountryClassSF]

I have seen many  openly admit that they are all about making Christians feel hurt.  Our happiness and our feelings and our equality are meaningless

Ok, so give me a link or something. You must have documented some of this. Shouldn't be hard.

You know that no one will openly admit it too often. If it were truly about happiness and commitment, there wouldn't be a need for the in your face statements of many.

[CountryClassSF]

You just said you have seen MANY openly admit it.

Yes, but not to the media, not to the public. Just in the homosexual social circles.

[CountryClassSF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I am struggling to understand his point -but I didn't see him express any disdain.

[CountryClassSF]

AD expresses disdain with every word he types. It drips from him.

And as for you, without any evidence, I straight up don't believe a word you've got to say about homosexual social circles talking about getting married solely to spite Christians.

I just don't see it I'm sorry. I don't understand what he's saying about this, but hate would be expressing disdain for gay people, and  don't see where that was done.

That is my experience in social circles, those who did not flaunt were ostracized. I'm glad it wasn't yours.

[CountryClassSF]

Your social circles must have existed inside a Jack Chick tract.

How would your social circle react to a gay male who opposes SSM? You know the answer.

[CountryClassSF]

Your social circles must have existed inside a Jack Chick tract.

How would your social circle react to a gay male who opposes SSM? You know the answer.

They would cast him out, rend his garments and cover him with ashes. They would yell "unclean!" and then they would go back and get gay married just to spite him. Obviously.

I'm being serious.  And the last part, honestly, is serious-- That's how I feel. It's done to rub it in people's faces. Try being told you deserve to be alone and deserve no happiness.
That's true intolerance. That's true objection to equality

Casting aside those who are different, something gays fought for decades against.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/28/im-gay-and-i-oppose-same-sex-marriage/

[CountryClassSF]

Try being told you deserve to be alone and deserve no happiness.

What do you think Christians (not all, but a lot) have been telling gay people basically forever?

That they believe homosexuality is a sin, but still love you as a person.

[CountryClassSF]

The individual who wrote this article that I linked above was just published in the Federalist did so under a pseudonym out of fear of retribution from his gay social circle.


"The big secret in the LGBT community is that there are a significant number of gays and lesbians who oppose same-sex marriage, and an even larger number who are ambivalent. You don’t hear us speak out because gay rights activists (most of whom are straight) have a history of viciously stamping out any trace of individualism within the gay community. I asked to publish this article under a pseudonym, not because I fear harassment from Christian conservatives, but because I know this article will make me a target of the Gaystapo."

[CountryClassSF]

Use of "Gaystapo" marks him as obviously a very serious thinker.

The great Tammy Bruce coined the term "Gay Gestapo" - I prefer to use the longform myself.  The tactics they employ are gestapo-like.  Look at the ostracization.


This was a joy to read.

[CountryClassSF]

The media unfortunately enables that narrative. Hollywood too. Anytime someone disagrees with the leftist agenda it  is either because of a sinister motive such as racism or playing politics, or we are just uneducated. They've illegitimized deviation from Marxism.