ArchivedOn gay marriage, Bush co-opts polarizing issueMorgan wrote:Aineo,
Morgan, the Democratic Party started wooing the gay vote over 20 years ago, and gay activists wooed the Democratic Party.
Did they? I wasn't there... well, not to the point of politically aware, at least.
I was, so get your facts straight. Their presidential candidates still won't stand up and say they're in favor of gay marriage. So the fact that I'd choose any Democrat over Bush on this issue has less to do with what the Democrats are offering, and more to do with what Bush is threatening.
Clinton made promises to the gay community to get their support and when he attempted to implement them had to back down. So, again, get your facts straight. Gay marriage was not an issue when Clinton was in the White House. Bush is stating a personal opinion, as have Democrats who are running for election. So to assign a negative position to the President while not doing the same to other politicians is taking a hypocritcal stance on a topic dear to you.
I beg your pardon? I'm "assigning a negative position" to him because he wants to codify my legal inability to marry into the Constitution of the United States, such that my <I>state</I> will not even be able to grant me that right. The topic is indeed dear to me, but I fail to see where hypocrisy enters the picture.
And banning gay marriage is dear to me as it gives our youth the wrong signal, and if you are as concerned for the 97% who are not gay as you are for the 3% who are gay you would understand this. What I like most about President Bush's speech was the call for Congress to get the court system back under their control, which is their Constitutional responsibility.
Yes, you've said. Perhaps you could answer my question about this on the other thread?
What thread?
| View Parent Message View dfilename Return Home |