Question for the social conservatives on BGP

[Frances Bavier]

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/12/15/D8M1EEQ80.html

 

I'm just curious as to how this stance is viewed by the social conservatives on this board?

 

Effectively, Bush was elected by courting the fundamentalist vote. On one hand, the chant against gay marriage and for "family values" was unceasing during his run for power.

 

Yet, here we have him openly supporting the pregnancy of a lesbian.

 

Two items from the article stick out to me:

Asked if Bush believes that children who are raised by gay and lesbian parents are at a disadvantage, Snow said, "He does not make comments on that and nor will I."

 

and

 

A number of conservative groups have expressed dismay at Cheney's pregnancy.

 

I don't think it will come as a shock to too many of you, but I did not vote for W. If I had voted for him, based on what I perceived to be his views on financial responsibility, I would be highly upset with the performance.

 

Likewise, if I had voted for him based on socially conservative stances, I would have to say that this appears to belie that posture as well.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

Frances

[Diamond Dandy]

You really don't think they are going to touch that question with a ten foot pole, do you?

[Habib]

You really don't think they are going to touch that question with a ten foot pole, do you?

 

Probably just make incessant Kerry references instead of answer the question...

[All Tell]

Any woman has the right to become pregnant and have children regardless of her sexual orientation. I have never heard anyone suggest that lesbians should be steralized or imprisoned for getting pregnant. This has nothing to do with anyone's stance on same sex marriage.

 

I don't understand what the issue is that you are making.

[Frances Bavier]

Any woman has the right to become pregnant and have children regardless of her sexual orientation. I have never heard anyone suggest that lesbians should be steralized or imprisoned for getting pregnant. This has nothing to do with anyone's stance on same sex marriage.

 

I don't understand what the issue is that you are making.

 

"I'm" not making an issue. The issue is that you have a person that ran (and was, in large part, elected) on an appeal to social conservatives. The two main planks were banning gay marriage, and "family values". The hypocrisy is plainly evident, and since there are a slew of social conservatives upset by this, I am asking how the social conservatives on this board view the situation.

 

http://www.newsobserver.com/114/story/518639.html

News that Cheney's openly gay daughter, Mary, is pregnant has therefore touched a raw nerve, as advocates for conservative family values struggle to reconcile their loyalty to the Cheneys with their visceral opposition to same-sex relationships -- and particularly to raising a child without a father.

 

"Not only is she doing a disservice to her child, she's voiding all the effort her father put into the Bush administration," said Janice Shaw Crouse, senior fellow at the Beverly LaHaye Institute, the think tank run by Concerned Women for America.

 

As you can see, the issue is not of my making, but the making of the administration, and it's relationship with the socially conservative base that they played to for votes. That base, like those that thought they were voting for an administration that would exercise fiscal restraint, is reacting to the reality of what they are seeing and hearing.

 

 

Frances

[Dlbdonn]

The sperm doner was probably Rush .

[Habib]

"I'm" not making an issue. The issue is that you have a person that ran (and was, in large part, elected) on an appeal to social conservatives. The two main planks were banning gay marriage, and "family values". The hypocrisy is plainly evident, and since there are a slew of social conservatives upset by this, I am asking how the social conservatives on this board view the situation.

 

http://www.newsobserver.com/114/story/518639.html

News that Cheney's openly gay daughter, Mary, is pregnant has therefore touched a raw nerve, as advocates for conservative family values struggle to reconcile their loyalty to the Cheneys with their visceral opposition to same-sex relationships -- and particularly to raising a child without a father.

 

"Not only is she doing a disservice to her child, she's voiding all the effort her father put into the Bush administration," said Janice Shaw Crouse, senior fellow at the Beverly LaHaye Institute, the think tank run by Concerned Women for America.

 

As you can see, the issue is not of my making, but the making of the administration, and it's relationship with the socially conservative base that they played to for votes. That base, like those that thought they were voting for an administration that would exercise fiscal restraint, is reacting to the reality of what they are seeing and hearing.

 

 

Frances

 

I see the point, but I can't see the reaction they should have had to appease their base. Should they have come out and condemned the Vice President's daughter? They will catch flack either way. They will still appease the social conservative base as long as they don't legislate anything with regards to that.

[Frances Bavier]

I see the point, but I can't see the reaction they should have had to appease their base. Should they have come out and condemned the Vice President's daughter? They will catch flack either way. They will still appease the social conservative base as long as they don't legislate anything with regards to that.

 

The administration won't legislate anything - that is the domain of Congress.

 

The social conservative base that they played to for votes is upset. I'm not upset - they are.

 

 

Frances

[shooter]

I see no inconsistency in saying that an ideal family includes a father and a mother and a statement that says Ms. Cheney will be a loving parent to her child and wishing her the best. You might even say that wishing her the best is "very Christian" of Dubya.

 

Many parents do a wonderful job in raising a child in less than ideal situations and in some respects Ms. Cheney's child will have advantages that many other children will not.

[shooter]

The administration won't legislate anything - that is the domain of Congress.

 

Tell that to the Supreme Court of the state of Massachusetts.

[All Tell]

I don't think unmarried people should have children whether they are gay or straight.

 

I don't think that unwed parenthood should be criminalized.

 

I don't think that a lesbian having a child is a good thing but she is within her rights to do it.

 

I seen no hypocrisy at all in conservatives expressing concern about this.

[Habib]

The administration won't legislate anything - that is the domain of Congress.

 

And if Bush signs an act into law that is unpopular it will not be labeled as part of the "Bush administration" with all criticism laid squarely on Congress? How many people do you hear condem Congress for the Patriot Act? It's always Bush wiretapping phones.

 

The social conservative base that they played to for votes is upset. I'm not upset - they are.

 

I know you aren't. If the social conservative base is upset, they aren't exactly in the minority, and they can get in line with the rest of us. As to the effect this will have on future elections: Bush isn't running again and those same voters can be corraled into voting Republican again with a few commercials about liberals and gays.

 

To take that point further, Bush is out in about two years. I think a few posts in this forum (and I don't mean Frances') epitomize the Democratic party in its present state...blame Bush for EVERYTHING. Until the Democrats start running on their own ideas, their own plans, and their own agendas that make sense and are desirable for Americans, we will probably see another Republican in the White House with a social conservative base.

[Booge]

Probably just make incessant Kerry references instead of answer the question...

 

:lol: :lol: :thumb: CLASSIC.

[Hearsay]

I've looked at his comments from every angle, and I just don't see the argument here. He congratulated the daughter of his VP on the impending birth of her child, wished her well, and commented he thought she'd be a loving parent.

 

His comments are not a policy stance. Nor are they an affirmation of gay parenthood. Nor are they hypocritcal. The man is simply being nice and congratulatory. Him saying he wishes Mary Cheney well does not, however, rise to the level of him saying "you know, since Mary can obviously do it, I've changed my mind and I think lesbian couples should raise children." Bush has never said he is going to legislatively patrol people's homes and remove children of gay couples. The Defense of Marriage Act proposal had nothing to do with that. However, he is not going to legislate FOR them to have benefits, either.

 

I see absolutely nothing here.

 

As to the comment about the social conservative base being upset, so what. They were contorted about Elian Gonzalez and about Terry Schiavo too. Its a passing fancy for the media "How they gonna react to Mary, How they gonna react to Mary." It belongs in one of those magazines near the checkout aisle of the grocery store, but it is not a serious political discussion.

[Diamond Dandy]

Under current law, say five or six years into the relationship, and after a strong bond is set with the child and parents, and Mary Cheney dies, her partner has no leagal right to the child.