• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP governor eyeing Senate run to be outed in film tomorrow

I wouldn't out this guy if the choice was up to me. Just being a member of the republican party shouldn't make him a target.

However, this thread fails to mention the single biggest group to blame in all this: the jackasses who will attempt to destroy this mans political career simply because he is gay. The people outing him are partly responsible, but the bigots who attack him for his orientation are ultimately at fault.

Ideally, people would get more up in arms over economic policy that realizing what politicians do in the bedroom. Besides, all politicians tell the taxpayers to drop their pants and bend over at least one during their career.
 
Live by the sword. Die by the sword. :duel

From: Charlie Crist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While running for governor in 2006, Crist stated that gay civil unions were "fine," but did not support gay marriage.

On November 4, 2008, Florida voters approved Florida Amendment 2 (2008) by a margin of 62%-38%; an amendment which defines marriage as "the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife". Crist stated he did not favor Republican Party funds being spent on passing the ban, but did lend his name to groups working in favor of the amendment.

Prior to the vote, Crist was asked where he stood on the amendment and he stated: "I'll support it, I'll vote for it, move on... It's not top-tier for me, put it that way."

That's about as close to endorsing gay rights as a Republican can be right now. He's certainly a lot more progressive than most members of his own party...and more progressive than even a lot of Democrats. He supports civil unions, which (although insufficient) would be a step in the right direction for Florida.

I could easily envision Barack Obama saying exactly the same thing in the paragraph above.

ADK_Forever said:
If he were not an elected official I would say he deserves his privacy. But, as a Governor, and possibly Senator, with the power to enact, or at least influence, legislation, his constituents deserve to know the truth. I would feel the same if he were a Democrat.

Why? Why do his constituents "deserve to know the truth"? Do you expect to know the truth about whether Barack and Michelle do it doggy-style? Do you expect to know the truth about whether George Bush is circumcised? Do you expect to know the truth about whether Hillary Clinton shaves her *****? :lol:
 
Last edited:
Why? Why do his constituents "deserve to know the truth"? Do you expect to know the truth about whether Barack and Michelle do it doggy-style? Do you expect to know the truth about whether George Bush is circumcised? Do you expect to know the truth about whether Hillary Clinton shaves her *****? :lol:

Are any of them passing laws for those activities?

Or are you just hopeful?
 
Are any of them passing laws for those activities?

Or are you just hopeful?

As I asked earlier

Was Craig or Haggard attempting to get married to another man? If not, how was them being against gay marriage hypocritical?

Did Craig or Haggard attempt to file complaint with a job because they were descriminated against because they were homosexual? If not, how was them being against such legislation hypocritical?

Did Craig or Haggard believe that their homosexuality was a good thing that they were proud of and wasn't "sinful" or "wrong"? If not, how was them stating they believe that to be the case hypocritical?

Unless you're telling me ALL homosexuals MUST be for ALL homosexual rights and think that ALL homosexuality is COMPLETELY good than I don't understand what exactly they did that was hypocritical.

Unless he's saying that "All homosexuals should be jailed" or "All homosexuals should be killed" or "All homosexuals should be known" than he's not doing anything hypocritical or passing a law against "that activity"
 
Are any of them passing laws for those activities?

Or are you just hopeful?

Is Charlie Crist passing anti-gay laws? :confused:

He says he favors civil unions and that he's opposed to gay marriage but it isn't a major priority. For a Republican, that's extraordinarily progressive...and he isn't even from New England. His official position on the issue sounds identical to Barack Obama's, and one gets the feeling that neither Crist nor Obama would throw up any roadblocks to prevent gay marriage.
 
Last edited:
Is Charlie Crist passing anti-gay laws? :confused:

He says he favors civil unions and that he's opposed to gay marriage but it isn't a major priority. For a Republican, that's extraordinarily progressive...and he isn't even from New England. His official position on the issue sounds identical to Barack Obama's, and one gets the feeling that neither Crist nor Obama would throw up any roadblocks to prevent gay marriage.

And even if it was...is there some cardinal rule that says ALL homosexuals MUST believe in gay marriage?

Is this some kind of universal truth that I am not aware of? Is it hard wired in them that they can not believe marriage should only be a man and a woman?

I mean, if a politician drinks alcohol on occasion and always has a driver or a taxi take him everywhere and he comes out strongly in support of DUI legislation is it perfectly acceptable and moral to dig into his personal life, public every bit of alcohol he's ever purchased or drank even though he's never actually done the thing he's arguing against?

I don't get this whole "If you're secretly gay and against gay marriage politically, you're a hypocrite" bull****. Wouldn't it need to be "If you're secretly married to a member of the same sex in a place that allows gay marriage or are trying to become married to a member of the same sex secretly, but are against gay marriage politically" THEN you'd be a hypocrite?
 
As I asked earlier

Was Craig or Haggard attempting to get married to another man? If not, how was them being against gay marriage hypocritical?

Did Craig or Haggard attempt to file complaint with a job because they were descriminated against because they were homosexual? If not, how was them being against such legislation hypocritical?

Did Craig or Haggard believe that their homosexuality was a good thing that they were proud of and wasn't "sinful" or "wrong"? If not, how was them stating they believe that to be the case hypocritical?

Unless you're telling me ALL homosexuals MUST be for ALL homosexual rights and think that ALL homosexuality is COMPLETELY good than I don't understand what exactly they did that was hypocritical.

Unless he's saying that "All homosexuals should be jailed" or "All homosexuals should be killed" or "All homosexuals should be known" than he's not doing anything hypocritical or passing a law against "that activity"

Excellent argument. :applaud
 
Back
Top Bottom