No argument there. It just seems like most people had vitriol when is was suggested people were born homosexual as opposed to saying it is a choice. I didn't know the climate had shifted to saying it is a choice is taboo.

 

"Vitriol" - That's a new one on me.

 

Thanks for the new word that I can add to my vocabulary. :thumb:

 

Again proof that it's enriching to be a member of BGP.

I completely understand and expected PP and mcpapa and others of our Liberal Wing of BGP to think this isn't much of anything.

 

My biggest deal is the double standard, if any GOP leader or candidate had said the same thing they would be roasted all over the news.

 

I seriously doubt that. I'm sure if a GOP candidate said what Obama said including supporting the LGBT community's right to get married with benefits in all 50 states, the LGBT community would be ecstatic. Now, if they said lifestyle choice along with comparing homosexuality being a disease like alcoholism as one BGP member mentioned, then I can see why they would be roasted.

 

In their favor I guess they could argue that it's a "choice" to act on those impulses, but it's not a "choice" for those impulses to be there in the first place.

 

 

This is what I was trying - unsuccessfully, I might add - to get at.

Scorecard

Gay/Lesbian Community believes almost 100% they are Born that way...to say otherwise is an insult

 

Majority of Liberals (but not all), say (at least) that they feel the same way...IMO to curry their vote

 

Majority of Conservatives (but not all), say it is conditioning while growing up or a choice...IMO to curry the Christian vote.

 

If I'm gonna use a scorecard on the issue, I'm gonna side with the experts.

I thought one of the hallmarks of the drive for same sex marriage rights was that homosexuality WAS NOT a choice, you are born that way, therefore you shouldn't be discriminated against? Hasn't that point been pounded by supporters of same sex marriage?

 

Seems to me like another case of Obama talking out of both sides of his face.

Again, if he is saying that homosexuality is a choice, I strongly disagree. If the term "lifestyle choice" means something else entirely, I can go along with that.

 

And I guess "roasted all over the news" depends on the source of the news. I get pretty much all of my news here.:thumb:

The point, it seems to me, is what you're saying here wouldn't be considered (especially by the media) if it were said from someone in the GOP.

The point, it seems to me, is what you're saying here wouldn't be considered (especially by the media) if it were said from someone in the GOP.

 

Again - it depends on which media.

Again - it depends on which media.

Anyone but Fox.

Yeah I think the reaction to those interviewers is nuts. I wish every President was interviewed every month by regular Non-Press citizens!

 

Bravo to the President for doing this...I love that he did it!

IF she were more " regular" I'd have no problem with it .. regular doesnt wear TONS of green lipstick or video them selves in a bathtub full of milk and fruit loops - and while I dont we should'nt discriminate against lower IQ people its beneath the office to give a private interview to an absolute nimrod .

But then again the democratic part gave us Al Franken .

For what it's worth, I think it's simple:

 

Typically, people who argue that homosexuality is a choice have corresponding views that there is a morally correct choice, that people who make the wrong choice should be "repaired" or "cured," that society should scorn those who make the wrong choice, and the the government should not legitimize the wrong choice.

 

On the other side, those who argue that homosexuality is something beyond one's control have corresponding views that homosexuals should be treated equitably in society and under law and that it would be inhumane not to.

 

Whatever Obama's true views are, he has famously "evolved" on the issue to be much more consistent with the second approach. Therefore, it's obvious why his extemporaneous statement isn't loaded with the baggage the same statement from a president Huckabee or president Santorum would be.

 

 

Whatever Obama's true views are, he has famously "evolved" on the issue to be much more consistent with the second approach. Therefore, it's obvious why his extemporaneous statement isn't loaded with the baggage the same statement from a president Huckabee or president Santorum would be.

Translation: Political flip flop for political reasons by the president that wouldn't be viewed the same as anyone in the GOP in exact circumstances. Ever....

IF she were more " regular" I'd have no problem with it .. regular doesnt wear TONS of green lipstick or video them selves in a bathtub full of milk and fruit loops - and while I dont we should'nt discriminate against lower IQ people its beneath the office to give a private interview to an absolute nimrod .

 

Crazy doesn't necessarily connote stupidity.

Crazy doesn't necessarily connote stupidity.

 

But a lot of times does. Just sayin.