Anyone gullible enough to buy Obama’s explanation that his views on aberrant, unnatural sexual proclivities were “evolving” is probably gullible enough to vote for him.
This most radical socialistic president of all times undoubtedly supported gay “marriage” all along — he merely wished to delay announcing his position until after this election in hopes that undecided voters who oppose homosexual “marriage” might be strung along and cast their votes to return him to office.
Many national elections have been characterized as “the most important election in our lifetime.”
If any one truly deserves that sobriquet, it is this one.
Scott Chadwick
Marietta
Follow us on Twitter!
I want each candidate to tell me what their plan is to solve the economic problems of the United States and for the media to report on paper or on TV what those plans are without their slant.
Gay married couples would be able to obtain employment benefits presently denied to them separately. They would be able to visit their mate in the hospital when visits are restricted to "family". And a host of "RIGHTS" currently denied them.
And their marriage would not affect yours in ANY way---unless you are terribly paranoid.
One doesn't need to be pro gay marriage to be pro civil rights for all people. Even the ones that engage in "aberrant, unnatural sexual proclivities".
My own views have evolved similarly to Obama's, so I don't find the evolution of his views so hard to believe. I originally felt, "What's wrong with a civil union?" But if forced to pick a side, i would make the same pick Obama has.
Mr. Chadwick has this scenario in his head about how Obama wished to delay announcing his position. I think Obama would have been happy to avoid the whole thing. Gay marriage is one of those issues that can lose you votes a lot quicker than it will gain you votes.
Where Mr. Chadwick sees a planned conspiracy, I see more randomness. Biden says something, and then the president had to take a position. The republic will survive gay marriage handily, just as the military survived the end of "don't ask, don't tell"; with barely a ripple of turmoil.
No tinfoil hat needed.
And guess what Mr. Chadwick, Obama is going to get a second term. He won't win Georgia, but conservative enclaves like Cobb overestimate the ubiquity of like minded conservatives, and underestimate Obama's support in the rest of the country, relative to Mr. Romney.
Look at the numbers in the seven or so swing states. Imagine what happens after more than two years of Romney's tax returns are leaked, (I'm only guessing but I guess they will come to be public..after Romney is nominated).
If the republicans had nominated Huntsman, they'd have had a good chance. But Mr. Romney will not be able to beat Obama, and this voter is glad.
How the heck did you read my post and get this:
"As someone who has a gay member in the family, I guess I must be misreading your comment - you say you are going to vote for Obama (again) because he has "evolved" into believing gays should be able to "marry"?"
I didn't say that at all.
You ARE misreading my comment, but don't feel badly, I didn't understand parts of yours, either.
I will answer the parts of your post I understand.
I am going to vote for Obama, but I didn't make up my mind last week. His stance on gay marriage made no appreciable difference to me. But in Obama vs Romney, I vote Obama.
I might vote for Barney Frank, if I lived in the Massachusetts 4th district, but his being gay wouldn't have anything to do with it.
I'm not sure what you mean by the following part, it seems to contradict itself:
"And for yor information "don't ask don't tell" was a smashing success because the Pentagon was prohibited from publcizing all of the negatives that it caused in the ranks - the same as the rescinding of this caused major problems - not reported, but known about by those who are in the military."
I don't get the above paragraph. ?Caused major problems that are a secret from those that don't share your position as an elite as far as military information goes? Oooo K
Cite one "major problem".
I think you have difficulty seeing there weren't any major problems.
Truman's integration of race in the military caused some problems, too, should he have skipped it?
Scott Chadwick
"I guess I must be misreading your comment - you say you are going to vote for Obama (again) because he has "evolved" into believing gays should be able to "marry"?
....you DID misread my comment.
it is the same error as this one: "So why don't we just throw out all the laws and let everyone do what they want to do"
and this one: "I also assume you would have voted for Barney Frank because he is openly gay"
It is the "non sequitur" error, Latin for "it does not follow".