GOP friendlier to gay community -- at least behind the scenes

C

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
GOP friendlier to gay community -- at least behind the scenes

Barbara Ann Fenton made what was for some a shocking suggestion at one of the most traditionally conservative meetings leading up to the Republican National Convention.

The 31-year-old delegate from Rhode Island formally suggested that her party's ideological manifesto recognize civil unions for same-sex couples as well as straight ones.

"As a Roman Catholic, there's nobody in this room who believes (more than I do) that the definition of marriage is between one man and one woman, but those are my religious beliefs," Fenton said as she made the motion Monday. "This country was founded on the separation of church and state."



http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/25/politics/gop-lgbt-community/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

good lord...no pun intended ;)....i hope this an upward trend among the GOP. i know several homosexuals, less couples, but nonetheless, the majority of them have conservative economic etc views...however, they are turned off by the GOP's social views. so usually end up voting democrat, because in reality, the economic polices aren't that far apart.

like it or not...gay couples, especially men, tend to have more money and thus are more conservative about their money. i understand the need to not drop social issues completely from politics or the government, however, homosexual acts are no longer illegal.

GOP - let it go. are the sunday going GOP members going to insist i go to church on sunday?
 
enough said:
GOP friendlier to gay community -- at least behind the scenes

Barbara Ann Fenton made what was for some a shocking suggestion at one of the most traditionally conservative meetings leading up to the Republican National Convention.

The 31-year-old delegate from Rhode Island formally suggested that her party's ideological manifesto recognize civil unions for same-sex couples as well as straight ones.

"As a Roman Catholic, there's nobody in this room who believes (more than I do) that the definition of marriage is between one man and one woman, but those are my religious beliefs," Fenton said as she made the motion Monday. "This country was founded on the separation of church and state."



http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/25/politics/gop-lgbt-community/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

good lord...no pun intended ;)....i hope this an upward trend among the GOP. i know several homosexuals, less couples, but nonetheless, the majority of them have conservative economic etc views...however, they are turned off by the GOP's social views. so usually end up voting democrat, because in reality, the economic polices aren't that far apart.

like it or not...gay couples, especially men, tend to have more money and thus are more conservative about their money. i understand the need to not drop social issues completely from politics or the government, however, homosexual acts are no longer illegal.

GOP - let it go. are the sunday going GOP members going to insist i go to church on sunday?
Click to expand...


WOW...

So one 31 year old Rhode Island delegate thinks it's time to recognize "civil unions"...good for her.

Now if we can get the other MILLIONS of Republicans to go along with her.

btw...your title is bogus.
 
enough said:
did the title claim that?

did you read the article? because it is not just one person. that is not a true statement.
Click to expand...

What a surprise!

Just what I said earlier...one set of rules for Yurt...and another for those who disagree with him.


"Fenton's initiative, much to her own surprise, was met with a resounding shout of "second" from not one, but from a couple of people in the room."

Oh my heavens, my mistake...THREE whole members of the GOP...that of course means the title was right...the ENTIRE GOP is friendlier to homosexuals.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
What a surprise!

Just what I said earlier...one set of rules for Yurt...and another for those who disagree with him.


"Fenton's initiative, much to her own surprise, was met with a resounding shout of "second" from not one, but from a couple of people in the room."

Oh my heavens, my mistake...THREE whole members of the GOP...that of course means the title was right...the ENTIRE GOP is friendlier to homosexuals.
Click to expand...

i don't have a different set of rules. stop being a lying angry person. it is not surprising you ran away from my question though:

did the title claim that?

simple yes or no will suffice.

btw...there are more than three GOP members who support gay rights. acting as if there isn't doesn't help your image. from the article:

While the Republican Party may take anti-gay positions on paper, behind the scenes many who advocate for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender causes feel more accepted. There is even an ad that will run during the convention that will feature San Diego's Republican mayor, Jerry Sanders, speaking out in favor of allowing same-sex marriage. Sanders urges his party to do the same.
Click to expand...
 
enough said:
i don't have a different set of rules. stop being a lying angry person. it is not surprising you ran away from my question though:

did the title claim that?

simple yes or no will suffice.

btw...there are more than three GOP members who support gay rights. acting as if there isn't doesn't help your image. from the article:
Click to expand...


Yes.

The title didn't claim "Members of the GOP..."

It didn't say "Most of the GOP..."

It didn't say "A FEW members of the GOP..."

You chose a title that inferred, for whatever reason, the ENTIRE GOP...too bad you can't even own up to that simple fact.
 
so you LIED by claiming the title claimed that. it didn't infer anything. it simply said the GOP. it did not say all.

and liar...i didn't choose the title, CNN did.

if you continue down this dishonest path, i will ignore you.
 
enough said:
so you LIED by claiming the title claimed that. it didn't infer anything. it simply said the GOP. it did not say all.

and liar...i didn't choose the title, CNN did.

if you continue down this dishonest path, i will ignore you.
Click to expand...

Another Yurt lie...you chose to title the thread.

Once again we find Yurt claiming that when ANYONE ELSE creates a thread, they are responsible for the title of that thread...

But Yurt, who is so special he operates under a completely different set of rules, IS NOT RESPONSIBLE when the title he chooses is misleading
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Another Yurt lie...you chose to title the thread.

Once again we find Yurt claiming that when ANYONE ELSE creates a thread, they are responsible for the title of that thread...

But Yurt, who is so special he operates under a completely different set of rules, IS NOT RESPONSIBLE when the title he chooses is misleading
Click to expand...

ok...you chose to continue the lies. i never claimed someone copying a thread title is responsible for it.

you're on ignore.
 
enough said:
ok...you chose to continue the lies. i never claimed someone copying a thread title is responsible for it.

you're on ignore.
Click to expand...

Another lie...you called me a liar for a thread I created that you claimed had an inaccurate title...but hey, whats one more lie to a guy like Yurt?

And look at that...the widdle baby couldn't take it any more and put me on ignore.

Just what I'd expect a coward like you to do when now that you've been cornered and can't run any more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top