Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   

Your Ad Here

Could the GOP go for Thompson?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conservative Corner
Author Message
chevydriver1123
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Posts: 442
Location: Newburgh New York

PostPosted: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
little lai wrote:
chevydriver1123 wrote:
if he kisses the ass of the evangelicals he can win the GOP nomination


who? john mccain? that seems to be his strategy.



There is also rumors that Guilliaini is starting to do that as well
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Mon Apr 30, 2007 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Not rumors. Guilliani just flopped - very publicly - on civil unions.
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3796

PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2007 9:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Man of the people.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 524
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2007 5:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Not rumors. Guilliani just flopped - very publicly - on civil unions.

I'm not trying to say you're wrong on this, but here's what his official campaign page has to say on the subject:

Quote:
Marriage
Rudy Giuliani believes marriage is between a man and a woman. He does not - and has never - supported gay marriage. But he believes in equal rights under law for all Americans. That's why he supports domestic partnerships that provide stability for committed partners in important legal and personal matters, while preserving the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman.
http://www.joinrudy2008.com/index.php?section=2

That does not sound to me like someone who has come out against civil unions.
Back to top
jusdeadphunky
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Posts: 2071

PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2007 4:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
chevydriver1123 wrote:
little lai wrote:
chevydriver1123 wrote:
if he kisses the ass of the evangelicals he can win the GOP nomination


who? john mccain? that seems to be his strategy.



There is also rumors that Guilliaini is starting to do that as well


he can't with out condemning a woman's right to choose. haven't you ever seen jesus camp? to the evangelicals abortion holds the competitive edge over hating gays.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2007 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
exton wrote:
Not rumors. Guilliani just flopped - very publicly - on civil unions.

I'm not trying to say you're wrong on this, but here's what his official campaign page has to say on the subject:....
That does not sound to me like someone who has come out against civil unions.


I don't know what his position on it is now...he may have flipped back. But...well, here, read this:

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/....._0426.html
http://www.nysun.com/article/53313

In fact, if you search google for "giuliani civil unions", the entire first page is about him coming out against them.

But, like i said, he may have flipped back...again.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 524
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 2:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
TrespassersW wrote:
exton wrote:
Not rumors. Guilliani just flopped - very publicly - on civil unions.

I'm not trying to say you're wrong on this, but here's what his official campaign page has to say on the subject:....
That does not sound to me like someone who has come out against civil unions.


I don't know what his position on it is now...he may have flipped back. But...well, here, read this:

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/....._0426.html
http://www.nysun.com/article/53313

In fact, if you search google for "giuliani civil unions", the entire first page is about him coming out against them.

But, like i said, he may have flipped back...again.

Or maybe the media is just painting it that way.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 2:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That's a degree of reality denial that's unbecoming of you.

Plus, flip-flopping is a minor offense. The real problem is that rudy is insane.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 524
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 2:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Exton - Read your own sources; Giuliani has not come out against same gender unions, he has stated that he disagrees with the New Hampshire model for same.

Quote:
In a startling departure from his previously stated position on civil unions, Mayor Giuliani came out to The New York Sun yesterday evening in opposition to the civil union law just passed by the New Hampshire state Senate.
...
"In this specific case the law states same sex civil unions are the equivalent of marriage and recognizes same sex unions from outside states. This goes too far and Mayor Giuliani does not support it."

Now, I think it is fair to say that this clarifies Giuliani's position and that he may not be sufficiently for extending rights to same gender partners, but that is not the same thing as choosing to deny them those rights. Giuliani's stated position at this time may not be everything gay rights activists are lobbying for, but the door seems open to them despite the media's claims that he's slammed it shut.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 2:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
"Sure, i definitely support apples...it's just that i only support apples that are orange in color and that have a juicy, citrusy taste."
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 524
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 4:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That would be funny, if it weren't just code for "I'm going to choose to believe what the media is trying to mislead me into believing, rather than paying attention and understanding what's true." (Which is actually pretty sad.)

Giuliani's campaign did not say he's against civil unions; it said he's against NH's law codifying same, and for the reasons given.

I'd like to know what rights Giuliani's domestic partnerships would carry, and what rights they would not. If they provide for same gender partners to be afforded identical status to married persons under the law, I'd say he's on the right side of the issue. (I'm inclined to doubt that he'd do it right though. He seems to want to play both sides on this issue, and that's a recipe for losing people on both sides.)
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
That would be funny, if it weren't just code for "I'm going to choose to believe what the media is trying to mislead me into believing, rather than paying attention and understanding what's true." (Which is actually pretty sad.)

Giuliani's campaign did not say he's against civil unions; it said he's against NH's law codifying same, and for the reasons given.


Give me a break. He's effectively saying "i support civil unions, just not ones that give couples the benefits that come with being married". That's like saying "i support the right to have abortions that don't result in the death of a fetus". It's double-talking nonsense.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 524
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 5:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Give me a break. He's effectively saying "i support civil unions, just not ones that give couples the benefits that come with being married".

Is that what he's effectively saying?

Look again at what HE says he's saying:

Quote:
Marriage
Rudy Giuliani believes marriage is between a man and a woman. He does not - and has never - supported gay marriage. But he believes in equal rights under law for all Americans. That's why he supports domestic partnerships that provide stability for committed partners in important legal and personal matters, while preserving the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman.
http://www.joinrudy2008.com/index.php?section=2

Where in that does he say what rights he would not give them?

Besides, the president should have nothing to do with this issue. It's an issue for each state to decide; which is what seems to be happening now.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 5:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
exton wrote:
Give me a break. He's effectively saying "i support civil unions, just not ones that give couples the benefits that come with being married".

Is that what he's effectively saying?

Look again at what HE says he's saying:


Yep. And he ALSO says:

In this specific case the law states same sex civil unions are the equivalent of marriage and recognizes same sex unions from outside states

So, how do you give same sex couples equal protection under the law, without making civil unions equal to marriage under the law?

That's nonsense.

Quote:

Besides, the president should have nothing to do with this issue. It's an issue for each state to decide; which is what seems to be happening now.


I think there's a legitimate federal case to be made of it. It's gender discrimination; men can marry women, but women can't marry women. Women can marry men, but men can't marry men. Gender discrimination.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 524
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Yep. And he ALSO says:

In this specific case the law states same sex civil unions are the equivalent of marriage and recognizes same sex unions from outside states

I assume that he's balking at setting a precedent whereby a civil union entered into in one state must be recognized by another state. You might not want it left to each state to decide this matter, but that's where it should be, and where it lies with marriage. If a given state doesn't get it right, take it up with them, but lets not intrude the feds into every issue where a state might not do what people elsewhere want.

And here's a report on Giuliani speaking on the issue again on 5/12:

Quote:
He said he supported civil unions but believed that marriage is reserved for the union of a man and a woman.
http://www.spokesmanreview.com.....?ID=189393


For my money, I like Thompson's approach to the issue. He doesn't personally favor same gender unions, but he'd leave it to the states to decide the issue.

Quote:
Thompson does not favor gay marriage, or even civil union, but says he believes the issue of civil unions should be left to the states.
http://www.enterstageright.com.....0507ft.htm


exton wrote:
Quote:
Besides, the president should have nothing to do with this issue. It's an issue for each state to decide; which is what seems to be happening now.

I think there's a legitimate federal case to be made of it. It's gender discrimination; men can marry women, but women can't marry women. Women can marry men, but men can't marry men. Gender discrimination.

Um, no. It seems that way, I know, but in a very real legal sense there is no such inequality so long as the statute is applied equally to everyone regardless of gender or sexual preference; and it is. What most people fail to understand is that the question of whether you desire that which is not permitted you is not a legal question. Gun control laws are not said to be unequally applied simply because they impact those who want guns and not those who don't. The same is true here. As a heterosexual man, I can't marry another man. Were I homosexual, this would not change. The law applies identically to me regardless of my sexual preference. If the law said that homosexuals can't marry the same gender but heterosexuals can, that would be discriminatory and would fall afoul of equal protection guarantees.

If you want to make a legal argument against current societal norms, calling on the 14th amendment isn't a winner. (But again, the better option is to work within your state to change the law and allow for same gender unions that carry the same legal status as traditional marriages.)
Back to top
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conservative Corner All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Add to My Yahoo! Add to Google

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites Politics Blogs Politics