January 25, 201214 yr The first salient comment I have to the topic is this: Whether I agree with Gov. Christie's personal view of the issue, the fact that he's willing to put it to the voters to decide is exactly why I would seriously consider him in a Presidential race.
January 25, 201214 yr I saw this on a friend's Facebook page.[ATTACH]35551[/ATTACH] No body cared that Clinton did it. Why should anyone care if Newt did it?
January 25, 201214 yr No body cared that Clinton did it. Why should anyone care if Newt did it? I don't care, myself that he did, it's his personal life. My same exact stance with Clinton. However, I think it's a fair question considering his position on same-sex marriage. Clinton didn't campaingn with opposition to that issue, thus yours is not an apples-to-apples analogy.
January 25, 201214 yr Did Newt cheat with someone of the same sex? Cheaters are allowed opinions aren't they?
January 25, 201214 yr I think most people would be for letting each state decide. I also think for most people it's a low level issue. Bingo! The judge or preist or minister says by the power vested to me by the STATE of -------- and the almighty God, I now pronounce you man and wife. It's not a federal issue. It's a matter for the states. Of course I feel that way about most things that the federal government has taken over that according to the constitution fall under the authority of the states. Just like abortion. My issue is not with should abortion be legal or illegal. My issue is with Roe v Wade and the federal government trumping states rights. It's not their call!
January 25, 201214 yr Did Newt cheat with someone of the same sex? Cheaters are allowed opinions aren't they? On the impact of an action on the sanctity of marriage? Seriously? You really confound me sometime. I have NO IDEA where you are coming from.
January 25, 201214 yr Christie's stance is pragmatic in NJ today and by 2016 should be pragmatic for most of the nation. But this just points that the government should not be in the business of defining marriage one way or another. Personally, I have no issue with this issue. But I can not figure out how an institution that existed for over 3,000 years around the globe in different societies and cultures is usurped by states of a 235 year old Constitutional Republic.
January 25, 201214 yr But they are not the "most" in that group. They are still a minority in the primaries of most states.I haven't seen the numbers to really know. But, I do know that they are a powerful group and one that has caused Romney and McCain to change their stances on issues. It's hard to win the GOP nomination in today's Republican Party without pandering to them. Anyone who says different isn't being real with themselves.
January 25, 201214 yr Christie's stance is pragmatic in NJ today and by 2016 should be pragmatic for most of the nation. But this just points that the government should not be in the business of defining marriage one way or another. Personally, I have no issue with this issue. But I can not figure out how an institution that existed for oDver 3,000 years around the globe in different societies and cultures is usurped by states of a 235 year old Constitutional Republic. Really? In a number of countries homosexuality is a death sentence. How is a 235 year old Constitution usurping that. Seems to me it's protecting it. It just hasn't determined if marriage is legal. And in my opinion it's not a constitutional issue. It's a matter for the states. Edited January 25, 201214 yr by coldweatherfan D
January 25, 201214 yr Author What impact COULD it have on a POTENTIAL primaty in 4 to 8 years???? Slow day today Clyde? Not really. Saw a tweet from the Gov today and it caught my interest. Curious how the far right will take this.
January 25, 201214 yr It's not even on the list. It's pretty sad that so many people see it as an important issue IMO. Agreed. Let them do what they want. It's not hurting anyone. It's extremely low down the list for me.
January 25, 201214 yr I rank it near the bottom but I'm sure there are plenty out there who rank it near the top.
January 25, 201214 yr On the impact of an action on the sanctity of marriage? Seriously? You really confound me sometime. I have NO IDEA where you are coming from. So you would be fine with Newt's opinion if it agreed with yours yours? Or because he has divorced, he is not allowed an opinion at all?
January 25, 201214 yr Author So you would be fine with Newt's opinion if it agreed with yours yours? Or because he has divorced, he is not allowed an opinion at all? Cammando, let me introduce you to Rockmom.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.