• 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!

Romney Accidentally Crashes Gay Vets Date

misterman said:
Yeah, they said that about blacks incessantly whining about civil rights too.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, he should be penalized. Then you could visit him in the penalty box and give him a good row? That is, if you could find the guts.
 
Sig said:
Perhaps, he should be penalized. Then you could visit him in the penalty box and give him a good row? That is, if you could find the guts.
Click to expand...

Do you have a substantive response to my point or not?
 
Sig said:
That may all be true, but it is relevant only in the capacity that one might argue that dissing the gays is a means of garnering support from heteros who comprise 98% of the citizenry and, though they may indeed be pissed off about all of the above, are also irratated by the seemingly incessant whining of the gay community about gay marriage at a time in history when there are much more important matters which need attention.
Click to expand...

Yeah, those guys are just whining about how they are being denied fundamental civil rights, the big whiners. Mr Sig, perhaps you should let them know when it would be a convenient time for people to want equal rights? We wouldn't want to mess with your busy schedule or anything.

Let me guess: You're straight, white, and male.
 
Deuce said:
Yeah, those guys are just whining about how they are being denied fundamental civil rights, the big whiners. Mr Sig, perhaps you should let them know when it would be a convenient time for people to want equal rights? We wouldn't want to mess with your busy schedule or anything.

Let me guess: You're straight, white, and male.
Click to expand...

Dont think he realizes that my rights are important to me.
 
Tigger said:
Made a PROFIT. Which is more than most citizens do with their welfare checks.

If the government is stupid enough not to put restrictions on how that money must be used, that's a Governmental issue, not a Corporate issue.
Click to expand...

If more citizens had jobs there would be less citizens on welfare.
Providing jobs for American citizens is a Corporate issue.
One which they have not only failed in doing but removed the jobs that were available.:peace

Plus I might ask a question.
Why is it when people get money to help them it's welfare, yet when corporations get money to help them it's called bailout?
 
Last edited:
joko104 said:
I suspect this story was concocted by the Romney team as it is highly favorable to him among anti-gay Republican voters.

Otherwise it is a non-story, no different than if a Democrat were to while campaigning explain he/she will protect a woman's right to an abortion - not realizing he is speaking to a Southern Baptist minister.

The attempts in this election to make scandle out of nothing is really going to become quite sickening. All the Republican candidates now are anti-gay rights, so what's the point of the story other than that?
Click to expand...

The point, rather the question is what else is the Republican party anti- or against.
More than one Republican has said they are anti big government, more than one right wing supporters said they were anti OWS protestors, many on the right have stated they are anti pro-choice they have stated they are against welfare and unemployment extensions.
So other than big business, corporations , rich and organized religion what are they for???:peace
 
Last edited:
Sig said:
That may all be true, but it is relevant only in the capacity that one might argue that dissing the gays is a means of garnering support from heteros who comprise 98% of the citizenry and, though they may indeed be pissed off about all of the above, are also irratated by the seemingly incessant whining of the gay community about gay marriage at a time in history when there are much more important matters which need attention.
Click to expand...

I would guess the whining is coming more from the rich and the Tea Party than the gays.

I will say this much , there is a parchment you might want to look up it begins with three simple words.
"WE THE PEOPLE".

It don't say WE THE RICH , or WE THE STRAIGHT it says "WE THE PEOPLE":peace
 
Goshin said:
Opposing gay marriage is extremism?

Since when?




Depending on which set of polls you believe, the country is almost evenly divided on the question, and which side currently holds the majority is debateable.


Americans' Opposition to Gay Marriage Eases Slightly




For First Time, Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage


I am mildly opposed to it; I don't think it fits the definition, history and purpose of the term, though I'd be okay with an equivalent civil union depending on details. It isn't really one of my bigger issues though.


Also, anti-SSM =/= anti-gay. Anti-gay is people who want to bring back sodomy laws and apply them to gays, etc.
Click to expand...

It's not just one thing that makes it that way. It's these:

1) Anti-gay and/or same-sex marriage
2) Don't believe in global warming
3) Will never raise taxes no matter what
4) Cut every program ever because they are liberal
5) Pro-life
6) Religious
7) Pro Capital Punishment
8) Pro-drilling
9) Anti alternative energy policies
10) etc

If a conservative candidate does not fit the bill on almost everyone of these 10 things, he/she will just get roasted every time he/she goes on stage to debate. You have to be an neo-conservative to run for president and be taken seriously lately.
 
Deuce said:
Yeah, those guys are just whining about how they are being denied fundamental civil rights, the big whiners. Mr Sig, perhaps you should let them know when it would be a convenient time for people to want equal rights? We wouldn't want to mess with your busy schedule or anything.

Let me guess: You're straight, white, and male.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, you should take some time out of your busy schedule and learn the difference between a prescriptive statement and a descriptive one. The point of the matter is that an unemployed father of 2.3 children is not likely to perceive the issue of gay marriage as being particularly important right now. Indeed, he may find the seemingly constant revisiting of the issue by the gay community via the news media as particularly irritating in the context of the more pressing existential difficulties which he is presently experiencing. Therefore, this so-called "crash" by Romney may actually advance him in the polls.

Let me guess: you're gay, martian, and utterly self-absorbed.
 
whysoserious said:
It's not just one thing that makes it that way. It's these:

1) Anti-gay and/or same-sex marriage
2) Don't believe in global warming
3) Will never raise taxes no matter what
4) Cut every program ever because they are liberal
5) Pro-life
6) Religious
7) Pro Capital Punishment
8) Pro-drilling
9) Anti alternative energy policies
10) etc

If a conservative candidate does not fit the bill on almost everyone of these 10 things, he/she will just get roasted every time he/she goes on stage to debate. You have to be an neo-conservative to run for president and be taken seriously lately.
Click to expand...

No different for Democrats on the opposite side. Shut down every oil well and coal mine. Legalized Abortion. Alternative energy at any costs. For any policy even sensed is environmentalism etc.
 
This issue actually isn't gay marriage. Exactly nothing prevents gays from marrying.

Rather, it is a question of equality under the law in terms of insurance, taxes, community property, insurance, adoption eligibility etc.

The "offense" of the gay couple was no offense at all. It is an absurd concept that before a politician talks to anyone the person/people they are going to be speaking to first are investigated to make certain they agree with the candidate/politician in advance. It is candidates who are vetted, not voters.

In the past I was challenged and confronted when on a "date" (if it could be called that) for other reasons (age difference and race difference) by people quite a few times. My response would be to inform the person to immediately get away from me making it clear that I would hurt that person if he didn't. Realizing his mistake, whoever it was would do exactly what I insisted quickly. I am intolerant of anyone getting in my face, but not disturbed by it either.

In short, the gay couple should have told Romney GTFO and that the end of it. Nothing wrong with Romney approaching them as potential voters with his view.

There is no story about Romney's position offending gays. That's already known. Nor is Romney different from the other Republicans on that issue.
 
Last edited:
joko104 said:
This issue actually isn't gay marriage. Exactly nothing prevents gays from marrying.

Rather, it is a question of equality under the law in terms of insurance, taxes, community property, insurance, adoption eligibility etc.

The "offense" of the gay couple was no offense at all. It is an absurd concept that before a politician talks to anyone the person/people they are going to be speaking to first are investigated to make certain they agree with the candidate/politician in advance. It is candidates who are vetted, not voters.

In the past I was challenged and confronted when on a "date" (if it could be called that) for other reasons (age difference and race difference) by people quite a few times. My response would be to inform the person to immediately get away from me making it clear that I would hurt that person if he didn't. Realizing his mistake, whoever it was would do exactly what I insisted quickly. I am intolerant of anyone getting in my face, but not disturbed by it either.

In short, the gay couple should have told Romney GTFO and that the end of it. Nothing wrong with Romney approaching them as potential voters with his view.

There is no story about Romney's position offending gays. That's already known. Nor is Romney different from the other Republicans on that issue.
Click to expand...

Why doesn't Romney go to a OWS protest after all nothing wrong with approaching potencial voters with his veiw right?:peace
 
joko104 said:
There is no story about Romney's position offending gays. That's already known. Nor is Romney different from the other Republicans on that issue.
Click to expand...

Huntsman and Paul hold different views on this issue.
 
presluc said:
Why doesn't Romney go to a OWS protest after all nothing wrong with approaching potencial voters with his veiw right?:peace
Click to expand...

Because they're too busy wallowing in their own filth to get out and vote, and Romney is afraid of catching something.
 
Viktyr Korimir said:
Because they're too busy wallowing in their own filth to get out and vote, and Romney is afraid of catching something.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that about all of the OWS protestors



but it's certainly true of some of them
3080121587_8999ace619.jpg
 
Viktyr Korimir said:
Because they're too busy wallowing in their own filth to get out and vote, and Romney is afraid of catching something.
Click to expand...

Maybe he might catch some common sense while he's over there.
 
sangha said:
I wouldn't say that about all of the OWS protestors



but it's certainly true of some of them
3080121587_8999ace619.jpg
Click to expand...


LOL, but I don't think the OWS is in the streets to pick up chicks.

As for the Ron Paul sign, no wonder people think the protestors are living in filth, must have saw the Ron Paul sign and nothing else. lol.:peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom