McCain Guru to GOP: Back Gay Marriage
EmailABC News’ Teddy Davis reports: The architect of John McCain’s 2008 campaign for president urged the Republican Party on Friday to drop its opposition to same-sex marriage lest it find itself in the political wilderness for years to come. "If the party is seen as anti-gay, then that is injurious to its candidates" in Democratic-leaning and competitive states, said Republican strategist Steve Schmidt. Schmidt’s push for gay marriage comes as his party is grappling with a string of gay rights victories in Iowa, Vermont, and Washington, D.C. Schmidt’s former boss, Arizona Sen. John McCain (R), continues to oppose same-sex marriage while also opposing a federal constitutional amendment prohibiting it. McCain’s daughter, however, has become an outspoken advocate of same-sex marriage recently and is slated to address the Log Cabin Republicans on Saturday evening. The topic of her address is: "Losing the Next Generation: How Can the Republican Party Attract More Young Voters?" Schmidt, who said he would always be a Republican, sought to make a conservative case for gay marriage. "There is a sound conservative argument to be made for same-sex marriage," said Schmidt. "I believe conservatives, more than liberals, insist that rights come with responsibilities. No other exercise of one’s liberty comes with greater responsibilities than marriage." Schmidt acknowledged that legalizing gay marriage would represent a change of tradition, but he vehemently rejected the view that gay marriage "threatens the rights of others." From the standpoint of practical politics, Schmidt thinks Republicans need to change their stance on gay rights because swing voters use the issue as a prism for evaluating how tolerant a candidate is. While he expects younger voters to become more receptive to the Republican Party’s low-tax message as they grow older, he does not expect younger Americans to become more conservative on gay marriage as they grow older. "I’m confident American public opinion will continue to move on the question toward majority support, and sooner or later the Republican Party will catch up to it," said Schmidt. Schmidt attributed his feelings about gay marriage to having a sister who is a lesbian and argued that American attitudes are shifting as they get to know gays in their family, workplace, and circle of friends. "As former Vice President Cheney observed, freedom means freedom for everybody. And I think Republicans should always be on the side of freedom and equal rights," said Schmidt. Although Schmidt did not explicitly make this point, it was not lost on his audience that Cheney has a daughter who is a lesbian. While offering a full-throated endorsement of same-sex marriage, Schmidt was careful to say that he does not support establishing gay marriage through "judicial fiat." Of the four states which currently recognize gay marriages — Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, and Iowa — only Vermont established same-sex marriage through non-judicial means. A right to same-sex marriage came to the other three states via court decision. The former McCain adviser said he respects the opinions of Americans who oppose marriage for gay couples on religious grounds. "I may disagree, but if you sincerely believe God’s revealed truth objects to it then it is perfectly honorable to oppose it," said Schmidt. He added, however, that if you put public policy to "a religious test you risk becoming a religious party, and in a free country, a political party cannot remain viable in the long term if it seen as sectarian." Schmidt does not expect any Republican candidates for president in 2012 to support gay marriage but he praised Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman (R), a possible White House contender, for recently speaking out in favor of civil unions, legal arrangements which provide gay couples with most of the legal rights of marriage while still preserving marriage licenses for heterosexual couples. The Log Cabin convention took place at the Westin City Center in Washington, D.C. The speech represented Schmidt’s first public address since McCain lost the 2008 election. Prior to leading McCain’s 2008 White House bid, Schmidt managed California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s (R) 2006 re-election campaign. He also served in the Bush White House where he played a leading role in the confirmations of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. He is currently a partner with Mercury Public Affairs in Sacramento, Calif. He first endorsed same-sex marriage in an interview last month with the Washington Blade, a gay newspaper. ABC News’ Ferdous Al-Faruque contributed to this report.
Santorum Clarifies Concerns on Women in Combat 
Gulf of Mexico to Become Gulf of America?
Steve Schmidt, shut the h%ll UP!
Posted by: sticky wish | April 17, 2009, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm
This is like listening to the coach of the 0-16 Detroit Lions tell people how to win football games. McCain lost, and now we have to listen to him tell Republicans how to win. You had your chance, fella, and you LOST.
Posted by: MNResident | April 17, 2009, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
It will be interesting to see if the Republican party can shake itself free from the religious fundamentalism and make this move back to conservative, small government with an emphasis on personal freedoms.
Posted by: jhw539 | April 17, 2009, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
Its still disgraceful that where ever Democrats run the country its two steps lower than a cesspool. But people believe the lies told to them from the media and Obama and still vote for liars.
Posted by: jhw539 | April 17, 2009, 9:24 pm 9:24 pm
Well the blacks had to fight for their rights. I think the gays need stand up for theirs if they want action.
Posted by: JJ | April 17, 2009, 9:41 pm 9:41 pm
Republicans …… YOU ARE NOT AGENTS OF MORALITY.
GET OVER IT.
Posted by: Omentum | April 17, 2009, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
It will be interesting to see if the Republican party can shake itself free from the religious fundamentalism and make this move back to conservative, small government with an emphasis on personal freedoms.
Posted by: jhw539
I believe that you were trying to say: Faith in GOD! Trust in this my friend, we can do both! No weddings for gays!!
Posted by: JimOnTheRight | April 17, 2009, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm
Marriage is ordained by god – not the state. Whats next Donkey/Human Marriage, its all about the money!!
Posted by: mj | April 17, 2009, 9:51 pm 9:51 pm
Just call it garriage! Same rights just a different name given that the historical meaning of marriage is a man and a woman.
Posted by: Huh | April 17, 2009, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm
McCain is a Rino, he was a loser way before he ran for office. This is exactly the actions he lost the race with
Posted by: md | April 17, 2009, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm
Let’s Get a Texas Secession Fund Going: Then we can enlarge on it from there to the whole South. We can finish the job that went unfinished by the Civil War. We obviously made a mistake inviting these snakes back into the Union. Texas is headquarters for the whole right wing dumbed down Republican idiot set. Texas singlehandedly has caused more grief and destruction to our people than any state in the Union. I would love to see them go. If we could get rid of them and the South we could graft in a TRUE INDEPENDENCE DAY. We wouldn’t just need MLK or 4th of July. Lincoln said “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.” He was fooled into thinking we needed the South to come back in.There isn’t anything the South makes or does that the rest of the country couldn’t just as well produce. We have all the goods and services they have. They have nothing to offer that is unique besides stupidity. California for example has as much oil, and agriculture and better weather and better technology than the South has, NASA and Houston included. Also, we wouldn’t have to put up with all their stymying of needed reforms that our country has done without due to their obstuctionism. So anyone up for starting a fund to get them out of here? They think their teaparty was a huge cause when it was only a tempest. They think their secession is a threat. We take it as a promise they need to keep. Who want’s to help them? Nobody with a brain would shed a tear for the end big corrupt oil and an expulsion of the economic masterminds of the destruction of our country. Their bigotry wouldn’t be missed either. Also, if they secede, they’d become a buffer zone to protect the rest of us from illegal immigration. They could rename the newly independent region “Baja Oklahoma”.
Posted by: JL | April 17, 2009, 9:58 pm 9:58 pm
If the GOP wants to desolve, they can abandon the Moral conservative vote. They will never be relavent again and a new party will emerge that will WIN. Morals and values are more important than $$ and America will respond or may we rest in peace.
Posted by: George | April 17, 2009, 10:05 pm 10:05 pm
does this mean that we can put texas behind the border?
well we sure will miss the cowboys but oh to lose a mostly backwards state is priceless.
how much money do you need JL. I have my checkbook open ready to stroke you a check
Posted by: Omentum | April 17, 2009, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
Hey JehovahWitness539__you said “Its still disgraceful that whereever Democrats run the country its two steps lower than a cesspool.>> (close quote).
My reply to you. If it’s a cesspool it’s because Republicans have left their excrement in it for the last eight years. The rest of the country that voted for Demccrats have been smart enough to climb out of the bowl on which you’re still rim-riding in the right wing. Everytime you Circus Elephants get into office we have to clean up a huge lake of elephant dung you left behind. Now you’re all hurt because you are not in power anymore and if God loves America you never will be again. Just remember, a leopard can’t change its spots and you’ll never change yours when you blame on others what yourself are guilty of.
But people believe the lies told to them from the media and Obama and still vote for liars.
Posted by: jhw539 | Apr 17, 2009 9:24:38
Posted by: steve_detroit | April 17, 2009, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
This is no turning point for the GOP Schmidt will merely be excommunicated from the conservative inner circle and end up an outcast peddling anti-GOP leadership books.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Posted by: matt | April 17, 2009, 10:11 pm 10:11 pm
Republicans …. remember when if you said something enough times folks would start believing it.
welll
it is not working now.
socialist – not working
marxist- hahahhaha
tea party – did I just hear a pin drop
patriotic – nope not working
freedom – could we have that word back?
bush spent like a drunk – what do we have to show for it?
obama is spending rebuilding America and investing and equipping America for an information age society.
so when when you say Obama is putting you children and grandchildren in debt i ask you 2 questions
Where were you when bush was doubling the national debt
Do you realize that Obama is investing in a future that will best accomodate the next generation?
Posted by: Omentum | April 17, 2009, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
For all the gay rights moves and marriage, I want to be able to marry more than 1 women, I would like 3 or 4. What about my rights??
Posted by: george | April 17, 2009, 10:19 pm 10:19 pm
“If the party is seen as anti-gay, then that is injurious to its candidates”
O.K., that sentence right there made me laugh out loud!
Next thing will be to ask Republicans to tone down the religion and act more liberal! Oh yeah, and maybe they ought to think about changing that “Republican” name, too – it kinda sends the wrong message, y’ know?
Posted by: Aaron | April 17, 2009, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
Move over Chairman Steele here’s another outcast from the republican party to join you.
Posted by: Omentum | April 17, 2009, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
If marriage is ordained by God, then let all the different religions decide who they will marry. I’m sure some of them will be glad to marry gays. Just make sure that the government doesn’t favor one religion (and their choice of who can get married) over another religion.
Posted by: ramp613 | April 17, 2009, 10:30 pm 10:30 pm
Republicans…don’t go away mad…just go away…and leave the rest of America in peace…
Posted by: FranklyMyDear | April 17, 2009, 10:31 pm 10:31 pm
“For all the gay rights moves and marriage, I want to be able to marry more than 1 women, I would like 3 or 4. What about my rights??” George, when gays can marry ONE person, then you can have all the women you want. Of course, you’re probably fortunate if just one woman would want you so, thinking you could find 3-4 more might be a stretch.
Posted by: Oh Really? | April 17, 2009, 10:35 pm 10:35 pm
I see in the absence of reason, the kids have taken to stealing screen names again…
Posted by: jhw539 - the real one | April 17, 2009, 10:44 pm 10:44 pm
Omentum wrote, “Republicans …… YOU ARE NOT AGENTS OF MORALITY. GET OVER IT.”
News flash, Omentum — the Democrats have no morality. Someone has to do the job. It might as well be us Republicans.
Get over it.
Posted by: JustMe | April 17, 2009, 10:44 pm 10:44 pm
Aaron:” Oh yeah, and maybe they ought to think about changing that “Republican” name, too – it kinda sends the wrong message, y’ know?”
In the wake of the last disastrous 8 years when George W. Bush was the official leader and highest ranking member of the Republican party (unless you want to claim it was Cheney), yes, yes it does.
Posted by: jhw539 - the real one | April 17, 2009, 10:46 pm 10:46 pm
JustMe:”the Democrats have no morality. ”
I’m confused – are they naive bleeding hearts who want to rob the rich to give to the poor, or immoral evil villains? The Republican’s slander is starting to contradict itself.
Posted by: jhw539 - the real one | April 17, 2009, 10:48 pm 10:48 pm
“sticky wish”, why are republicans so rude, judgmental, and foolish? GOP is trying to divide the country and ending up dividing itself.
Posted by: John | April 17, 2009, 10:49 pm 10:49 pm
Omentum said, “Do you realize that Obama is investing in a future that will best accomodate the next generation?”
What are YOU smoking? Your glorious “messiah” is spending Bush under the table. And don’t forget the scandulous Clinton years before Bush was elected. Or do you have selective memory?
Posted by: StopTheDemocraticMadness | April 17, 2009, 10:49 pm 10:49 pm
First of all-what’s with all of the gay headlines this week on ABC?
Second.. this is no surprise. Steve managed so very well to hurt McCain’s campaign. Like Barney 5 in a bad way. Don’t you think it’s kinda of odd. Think about what Stevie really accomplished.
Posted by: Joan | April 17, 2009, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm
John, are you trying to be funny or what!! The left wingers are nuts who are in CONTROL of the country!
Posted by: Joan | April 17, 2009, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
Omentum wrote, “Republicans …… YOU ARE NOT AGENTS OF MORALITY. GET OVER IT.”
News flash, Omentum — the Democrats have no morality. Someone has to do the job. It might as well be us Republicans.
Get over it.
Posted by: JustMe | Apr 17, 2009 10:44:43 PM
===================
Double zip zap newsflash back at you.
Nor do the Democrats claim to be agents of morality. We are agents of democracy. Unlike the republicans. I get my morality from church. Unlike the republicans.
The republicans who believe that on a select few should own the country. And when that is threatened they have a astroturf movement with teabags.
laughable
Posted by: Omentum | April 17, 2009, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm
Marriage is a human institution not a godly one. People need to get over that. The Republicans lost me when they went to the Religious Fundamentalist’s camps..and it looks like they lost most of the country. The republicans have not cornered tha market on morality. Hell, you backed Bush/Cheney for 8 years blindly. You used a war to justify torture. You started an unnecessary war. You killed 4000 troops. What morality.
Posted by: Dan Kolich | April 17, 2009, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm
StoptheDemocratMadness said…
What are YOU smoking? Your glorious “messiah” is spending Bush under the table. And don’t forget the scandulous Clinton years before Bush was elected. Or do you have selective memory?
Well give me Clinton and the “messiah” over the village idiot of Crawford any day. Old dubya was the worst president in history.
he doubled the national debt with NOTHING to show for it.
he send the country into a economic tailspin on his way out the door.
he is responsible for so much death and atrocities. so much pain to the military families who lost loved ones.
and don’t give me that he kept us safe crap. ask the families of the folks who perished on 911 how safe he kept us.
so if you can actually with a straight face say that obama IN JUST 3 MONTHS has been a worse president than Bush.
I must ask you WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING!!!!
Posted by: Omentum | April 17, 2009, 11:13 pm 11:13 pm
There is no argument that one can make on any grounds that marriage between consenting adults is a bad thing. Both morality and religion in this case are irrelevant as morally the only argument against homosexuality you can make is a religious one. And religion is a matter of personal choice. The simplest answer: Mind your own business, and stop being so concerned with how your neighbors live.
Posted by: mrpew | April 17, 2009, 11:16 pm 11:16 pm
Omentum, you are so much fun to jerk around. Thanks for the entertainment tonight. Buh-bye.
Posted by: StoptheDemocratMadness | April 17, 2009, 11:36 pm 11:36 pm
a breath of fresh air from the republicans!… good luck taking your party back from the religious right and the rush limbaugh/fox news bullies
Posted by: earth_not_flat | April 17, 2009, 11:40 pm 11:40 pm
aethiests get married, it is not a religious institution… and as long as it is a legal paper given by the government, the government has NO RIGHT to limit it to some people over others… if the government takes the word MARRIAGE out of it’s vocabulary, then i have no problem with the various religions using it and deciding in their churches who gets ‘married’, but as long as an aethiest can go and get a marriage license, then it is NOT a religious event and therefore, religion can NOT be a factor in who gets the license or not… this is such a simple civil rights issue it’s not funny
Posted by: earth_not_flat | April 17, 2009, 11:44 pm 11:44 pm
Through out history there have always been small numbers of homosexuals. Mistakes of nature, but natural selection keeps these abnormal mistakes in check. The current way mother nature does this is aids. Nature will always correct it’s self.
Ex Republican
Posted by: RGeier | April 17, 2009, 11:48 pm 11:48 pm
There is no argument that one can make on any grounds that marriage between consenting adults is a bad thing. Both morality and religion in this case are irrelevant as morally the only argument against homosexuality you can make is a religious one. And religion is a matter of personal choice. The simplest answer: Mind your own business, and stop being so concerned with how your neighbors live.
Posted by: mrpew
_________________________________
Republicans are NOT against gay people living together. The only issue is whether the gays should MARRY one another.
Actually the argument against gay marriage is not a religious argument at all. It is a health argument. I’m aure that even YOU have to admit, the majority of those who get AIDS are those in the gay community. The question is if we were to allow gay marriage, are we encouraging a lifestyle that kills people?
I think its time you also admitted something else. The majority of the public are really NOT on your side on this issue. If they were, there wouldn’t be a single state that doesn’t allow gay marriage and not a single soul would challenge it. I see at most, only a handful of state that actually allow it and I see people trying to challenge the ruling all the time.
Posted by: marco | April 17, 2009, 11:50 pm 11:50 pm
This whole religious thing is silly anyway. Why do so many people on this earth still believe in fairytales. Religion has killed more people than any other force on this earth. Thus, straight or gay, marriage should not be based on religion at all. I agree with McCain, religion should have no part in politics.
Posted by: upclosepls | April 17, 2009, 11:57 pm 11:57 pm
marco:”Actually the argument against gay marriage is not a religious argument at all. It is a health argument. I’m aure that even YOU have to admit, the majority of those who get AIDS are those in the gay community. The question is if we were to allow gay marriage, are we encouraging a lifestyle that kills people?”
That is amazingly ignorant. Promiscuity is the leading driver of AIDS transmission. Marriage reduces promiscuity regardless of gender.
As for the societal argument, encouraging people to form committed pair bonds benefits society. A couple will look after each other, help each other through periods of illness, unemployment, and other hardships. The family structure is the first line of support and it benefits society to encourage it. Society is not helped by denying people the right to visit their life mate of thirty years on their deathbed, or requiring them to hire a lawyers to figure out all the paperwork necessary to ensure the house they bought together won’t be seized by the state and sold to pay a gift-to-stranger tax after the funeral.
Allowing same-gender marriage encourages a healthier lifestyle and benefits society any way you slice the facts.
Posted by: jhw539 - the real one | April 18, 2009, 12:20 am 12:20 am
upclosepls:”Religion has killed more people than any other force on this earth.”
Stalin, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot… It’s not Religion that has killed more people, it’s power hungry madmen who hold that mantle. Religion is a powerful force for good in the world. While it does not belong in government, your comment appear ignorant of reality.
Posted by: jhw539 - the real one | April 18, 2009, 12:25 am 12:25 am
mj: This is for you if you happen to see it. You stated “marriage is ordained by God, not the state.” Would you name me one church or any God who has ever issued a marriage license. Marriage is a civil act and is not legal without a license being issued by the state. The matter of a religious ceremony just happens to be the choice of venue of those wishing to exercise their civil right. I’m glad to see one Republican finally figure out just what “civil rights” means.
Posted by: devilkev | April 18, 2009, 12:26 am 12:26 am
devilkev: Marriage is as much a religious act as a baptism. It is government that has chosen to take a term used for a religious institution for thousands of years and apply it to a legal contract and status.
Posted by: jhw539 - the real one | April 18, 2009, 12:32 am 12:32 am
What a bunch of ignorant backward bunch the republicans have become.
Posted by: unshrub | April 18, 2009, 12:43 am 12:43 am
If marriage is a religious act, why aren’t divorces also granted through the church instead of the state?
Posted by: dee | April 18, 2009, 12:59 am 12:59 am
I’ve always thought it ironic that the folks who are so opposed to equal rights are the ones who think themselves to be “real” Americans. To all you people against gay marriage, what other civilizations around the world do your think your views most resemble? Take a look at the Middle East fundamentalists for the answer. Is that what you want the US to be like?
Posted by: sgf82 | April 18, 2009, 1:02 am 1:02 am
**aethiests get married, it is not a religious institution… and as long as it is a legal paper given by the government, the government has NO RIGHT to limit it to some people over others… if the government takes the word MARRIAGE out of it’s vocabulary, then i have no problem with the various religions using it and deciding in their churches who gets ‘married’, but as long as an aethiest can go and get a marriage license, then it is NOT a religious event and therefore, religion can NOT be a factor in who gets the license or not… this is such a simple civil rights issue it’s not funny**-earth_not_flat
Thank you, I couldn’t agree more!
Posted by: Lexi | April 18, 2009, 1:03 am 1:03 am
RGeier,
Tell that to all the infected babies born to HIV positive HETEROSEXUAL females all over the world; because the babies deserved it didn’t they? And wow, all those millions of infected HETEROS in Africa sure are gay! You are a perverted creep and your ignorant and disgusting statement is why those that believe your view are loosing the debate. And by the way, throughout history there have always been ignorant and judgemental people that perpetuate societal problems (including AIDS), usually through religion. Your only saving grace is that you aren’t a republican.
“Through out history there have always been small numbers of homosexuals. Mistakes of nature, but natural selection keeps these abnormal mistakes in check. The current way mother nature does this is aids. Nature will always correct it’s self.
Ex Republican – RGeier”
Posted by: DS | April 18, 2009, 1:18 am 1:18 am
well, i happen to agree with him on this matter, however if i were the GOP, I’m not sure I’d listen to him for political advice. Last time I checked McCain lost. Badly. (I almost pity republicans, but then I remember what they did to my country.)
Posted by: dem in chicago | April 18, 2009, 1:27 am 1:27 am
This is rediculous. Schmidt knows that the GOP is nothing more than an intolorant group of white, homophobic, bible thumping, tax-hating men.
Posted by: sciencerulesovertheology | April 18, 2009, 7:53 am 7:53 am
Kind of reminds you of a person trying to tell the KKK to be more inclusive of other races. The GOP is crazy
Posted by: sciencerulesovertheology | April 18, 2009, 7:54 am 7:54 am
Islamic terrorists: Do it my way or I’ll kill you! Christian terrorists: Do it my way or you’ll burn Burn BURN! The Republicans are the Christian Taliban… Nothing new here, only a realization of the truth: religion poisons everything, and that we, as a people, have a long way to go before we cease to be ruled by our fears. Kudos to Schmidt in his courage for standing up to the KKK errr… Republicans. Eh, whatever, same thing.
Posted by: ReligionMustEnd | April 18, 2009, 8:22 am 8:22 am
dee said “If marriage is a religious act, why aren’t divorces also granted through the church instead of the state?” Because Christianity says you should not divorce. So why would you divorce through the church if it doesn’t condone divorcing?
Posted by: ellsbells930 | April 18, 2009, 8:41 am 8:41 am
==…the government has NO RIGHT to limit it to some people over others.==
Everybody is either man, or woman, male, or female. This includes those who claim to be homosexual. So, which one does the State stop from marrying?
Posted by: Mr. Incredible | April 18, 2009, 5:07 pm 5:07 pm
If ALL men may marry, and ALL women may marry, and everybody is either man, or woman, where’s the sexual discrimination in the law that defines “marriage” as the union of a man, as husband, and a woman, as his wife?
Posted by: Mr. Incredible | April 18, 2009, 5:09 pm 5:09 pm
Are those who claim to be homosexual also claiming to be members of a third sex?
Posted by: Mr. Incredible | April 18, 2009, 5:10 pm 5:10 pm
Isn’t Stevie gay? Maybe the republicans can stop judging as their God is supposed to do that, only. They aren’t God. Maybe closer to the Devil.
Posted by: sngeorgia | April 18, 2009, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm
The Republicans have an uphill battle. The Religious Right were used to elect GW Bush, and they were rewarded with inroads into US Government policies over the past 8 years. (Such as $1 Billion in federal funds spent of failed abstience-only sex ed programs.)
These voters believe our founding fathers created a “Christian Nation” (for example, because “Year of our Lord” is in the Constitution.) Many believe the Old Testament is the inviolate, carved in stone Word of God, and homosexuality is a “perversion”. They will not quietly walk away from the idea of a “Christian Nation” where marriage is ONLY for a man and woman.
If the Republicans move closer to accepting gay marriage, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the birth of a new Evangelica Christian party.
Posted by: Center One | April 19, 2009, 5:09 pm 5:09 pm
Homosexuality is SIN and shouldn’t be confused with a persons Race or Nationality.
Posted by: May Sonnet | April 19, 2009, 9:35 pm 9:35 pm
Abstinence sex ed failed in some cities because it is being taught without morality. Jesus made it clear that the Commandment,”You shall not commit adultery,” also is broken even if you lust in your heart. Who isn’t guilty of this? So when we stand before the just Judge, Jesus Christ we will be guilty of breaking his commandments and deserve hell. But God loves us so much that he sent Jesus to bear our guilt and punishment on the cross. That if you believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead and confess him as the Lord you will be saved.
Posted by: May Sonnet | April 19, 2009, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
Why shouldn’t THREE people get married if they are in love? Or how about FOUR? What about ONE person if they are in love with themself?
Posted by: It's Ok to Think | April 20, 2009, 9:13 am 9:13 am
If the Republican party suddenly begins to support gay marriage, what will that really say about them. It says that they are vote-whores who will do and say just about anything to get a vote to get back in power.
Posted by: DaveM | April 20, 2009, 12:18 pm 12:18 pm
May Sonnet – homosexuality has a biological origin, is likely genetic, and is no more controllable than the color of your eyes. The ONLY thing a homosexual CAN control is their behavior. However, to expect them to act like something they are not is like putting in colored contacts that are different than your natural color. Underneath that colored contact, you are still brown-eyed (or blue, green, gray, etc.) You can’t change genetic coding. And if you can’t change your natural being, how can it be a sin? Didn’t God make us who we are? The last I checked, He doesn’t make mistakes.
Posted by: DaveM | April 20, 2009, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm
May Sonnet, other Christian denominations believe the Old Testament is not the fixed Word of God – we believe it is an ancient compilation of texts, translated, re-written, interpreted, and edited for centuries.
Otherwise, how should we “pick and choose” which Old Testament passages are absolute and which ones are not?
For example, Leviticus 20:13 says, “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death.” This goes against the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament.
Posted by: Center One | April 20, 2009, 1:17 pm 1:17 pm
DaveM– the problem with your argument is that there IS NO genetic coding that differientiates homosexuality. There are no established gene or genone anomolities that predispose the human condition to homosexuality. Having now mapped the entire human genone, in all likelihood, there will be more evidence to support homosexuality as a environmentally conditioned “choice” than anything else, but don’t hold your breath on any extensive studies that debunk the theory of genetic homosexuality..
By the way, if it were genetic, then what would account for bisexuality?
Posted by: arkie vet | April 20, 2009, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm
Center one– actaully it does not go against the teaching of christ in the new testament. read Paul’s transcript to the Romans (bascially the entire first chapter of Romans is dedicated to the complete condemnation of homosexuality and lesbianism). Christ taught compassinon and forgiveness, but that is not to say that he excused acts that the Bible had long held as immoral.
Posted by: arkie vet | April 20, 2009, 4:20 pm 4:20 pm
Marriage is a civil institution – 1) you have to go to the government for a license – otherwise it doesn’t count, not even if its done by a church. You must have a legal document for it. 2) You don’t even need a church to be married. You can go to the justice of the Peace to get married – the church and god don’t even enter into the equation of marriage.
Posted by: bdjtexas | April 27, 2009, 11:02 am 11:02 am