• 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!

The sanctity of marriage and Newt!

Should newt stay off the topic of marriage?

  • Yes hes a massive hypocrite!

    Votes: 25 96.2%
  • No he should carrying on defending marriage from Gay people!

    Votes: 1 3.8%

  • Total voters
    26

Higgins86

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Messages
18,099
Reaction score
10,108
Location
England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Newt is against Gay marriage and has been very vocal about this throughout his campagin, he was also a big suppoerter of prop 8. My questions to you is should someone that is on his 3rd marriage and has committed adultery be allowed to lecture the general public on how marriage is a " Sacred tradition" and prevent other Americans from being married. When it comes to this paticular issue is the man being very hypocritical and should maybe keep his mouth shut and stop judging people on their life choices? ( we all know how he hates the media judging his) or is he right to still defend marriage from the gay community and keep it "sacred"
 
Last edited:
Your's isn't a poll. It's just you starting a thread on a topic already with at least half a dozen. :doh
 
Last edited:
Your's isn't a poll. It's just you starting a thread on a topic already with at least half a dozen.

(Are you a Ron Paul supporter by any chance?)


No not really a fan of anyone to be honest and yes it is a poll....
 
Yes. The man has no moral authority from which to speak on the subject.
 
Don't even get me started on this. It says a lot about social conservatives that they would nominate an adulterer to be the leader of the free world while condemning gays. I guess that serial monogamy is the new traditional definition of marriage. That sure would make Jesus proud, particularly since the very verse they use to argue that Jesus defined marriage as an institution only for men and women was Jesus condemning divorce. And now apparently he sought an "open marriage" at some point. Good grief. They idiocy and hypocrisy is revolting.
 
Should he be allowed to do so? Yes.

Should he do so? No.

Should his opinion be respected in this manner? Hell no.
 
My questions to you is should someone that is on his 3rd marriage and has committed adultery be allowed to lecture the general public on how marriage is a " Sacred tradition"

Of course he should be allowed to. That's that whole freedom of speech thing at work.

He's an enormous hypocrite for doing so of course, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be allowed to do it.
 
Of course he should be allowed to. That's that whole freedom of speech thing at work.

He's an enormous hypocrite for doing so of course, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be allowed to do it.

when I say allowed I really mean should he be able to continue bashing gay marriage and not be called out by either the media or his political foes! Would be interested to see if Obama would bring the point up in a debate vs Newt.
 
Of course he should be allowed to. That's that whole freedom of speech thing at work.

He's an enormous hypocrite for doing so of course, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be allowed to do it.
the question doesn't ask should he be allowed to, it asks should he stay off the topic of marriage.
 
Don't even get me started on this. It says a lot about social conservatives that they would nominate an adulterer to be the leader of the free world while condemning gays. I guess that serial monogamy is the new traditional definition of marriage. That sure would make Jesus proud, particularly since the very verse they use to argue that Jesus defined marriage as an institution only for men and women was Jesus condemning divorce. And now apparently he sought an "open marriage" at some point. Good grief. They idiocy and hypocrisy is revolting.

In real terms I do think that serial monogamy is the new social norm. The low percentage of people that have good lifelong marriages, as opposed to enduring lifelong marriage, is possibly so low that it might even be a good norm. Regardless, I think it is the new social norm - and that is excluding the HUGE number of serial monogamy co-habitations never obtaining marriage licenses.ve

Since YOU linked "social conservative" to "Jesus condemning marriage," to be legit you need to attach your link to Gingrich ever quoting Jesus on marriage in relation to gays, since that is your assertion of his hypocrisy.
 
Last edited:
In real terms I do think that serial monogamy is the new social norm. The low percentage of people that have good lifelong marriages, as opposed to enduring lifelong marriage, is possibly so low that it might even be a good norm. Regardless, I think it is the new social norm - and that is excluding the HUGE number of serial monogamy co-habitations never obtaining marriage licenses.ve

Since YOU linked "social conservative" to "Jesus condemning marriage," to be legit you need to attach your link to Gingrich ever quoting Jesus on marriage in relation to gays, since that is your assertion of his hypocrisy.

So let met get this straight...since I was angry at social conservatives trying to nominate an adulterer I now have to link Gingrich quoting Jesus?

Your logic sucks.
 
Newt Gingrich was appropriately named after a slimey aquatic amphibian. Anything he says or does should be treated accordingly.
 
So let met get this straight...since I was angry at social conservatives trying to nominate an adulterer I now have to link Gingrich quoting Jesus?

Your logic sucks.

Well that is your logic, not mine. And it is your own definition of being a social conservative. So prove it's an accurate one. I seem to remember that divorce rates are higher among conservatives than liberals and Bible Belt states tend to have the highest divorce rates. (but lower stats on unmarried cohabitation).

He's not like Ron Paul, if that's your point.
 
He doesn't have much personal authority on the matter. Would I like more public emphasis on the institution of marriage and its benefits to society? Yes. Would I like to exclude gays from that discussion? Absolutely not. I support gay marriage.
 
Newt is against Gay marriage and has been very vocal about this throughout his campagin, he was also a big suppoerter of prop 8. My questions to you is should someone that is on his 3rd marriage and has committed adultery be allowed to lecture the general public on how marriage is a " Sacred tradition" and prevent other Americans from being married. When it comes to this paticular issue is the man being very hypocritical and should maybe keep his mouth shut and stop judging people on their life choices? ( we all know how he hates the media judging his) or is he right to still defend marriage from the gay community and keep it "sacred"

I am against legalized gay marriage,domestic partnerships,civil unions or whatever other paper coated term there is for marriage.So I am not some pro-gay marriage loon jumping on some lets bash those against gay marriage band wagon. I do believe a man who has been married multiple times has no room to comment on the sanctity of marriage. Because if marriage was so sacred to him he wouldn't be getting a divorce every-time he felt like having a new flavor of the month. If the accusations of his bitter ex-wife are true then he is just a bigger hypocrite.
 
Last edited:
Well that is your logic, not mine. And it is your own definition of being a social conservative. So prove it's an accurate one. I seem to remember that divorce rates are higher among conservatives than liberals and Bible Belt states tend to have the highest divorce rates. (but lower stats on unmarried cohabitation).

He's not like Ron Paul, if that's your point.

I think you have distorted my logic in your own head. The only thing I accused Newt of is being an adulterer. I didn't even claim he was a social conservative.
 
I think you have distorted my logic in your own head. The only thing I accused Newt of is being an adulterer. I didn't even claim he was a social conservative.

He WAS an adulterer. Let's at least get the verb right.

Since I suspect about everyone stole something in their life, thus everyone is a thief and, accordingly, never ever should hold public office because obviously thieves should not hold public office. And theft is far more relevant to government position than adultery is.

Obama used cocaine, a felony. Clearly he should NEVER have been allowed to be president - which is relevant as the president does have authorities concerning drug laws - and definitely a cocaine user shouldn't hold a position concerning drug laws. For your wording, you would agree to the wording of "President Obama IS a cocaine user," right?

And certainly NO Democrat would vote for a cocaine user except those who argue cocaine should be legalized.
 
Last edited:
He WAS an adulterer. Let's at least get the verb right.

Since I suspect about everyone stole something in their life, thus everyone is a thief and, accordingly, never ever should hold public office because obviously thieves should not hold public office. And theft is far more relevant to government position than adultery is.

Obama used cocaine, a felony. Clearly he should NEVER have been allowed to be president - which is relevant as the president does have authorities concerning drug laws - and definitely a cocaine user shouldn't hold a position concerning drug laws. For your wording, you would agree to the wording of "President Obama IS a cocaine user," right?

And certainly NO Democrat would vote for a cocaine user except those who argue cocaine should be legalized.

He is having sex with someone who isn't his first wife. By Biblical standards that makes him an adulterer unless his first wife cheated on him or died.

And I don't like Obama and didn't vote for him so you are crawling up the wrong tree with that one.
 
Newt (and others) that oppose gay marriage have yet to demonstrate why it is harmful to anyone. How can two people's relationship harm others? Besides making the "homophobic" people feel queesy, it doesn't have any effect on anyone else whatsoever... (I dislike the term "homophobic", as it implies fear - when the more accurate emotion would be disgust [i.e. bigotry])

Most rest their case on biblical doctrines, but forget completely that this isn't a Christian nation - it is a nation largely composed of Christians, but the government of the US doesn't and can't support the establishment of any religion. Drafting laws based on religious ideologies would be supporting the establishment of religion (in this case, Christianity and Islam [though only by coincidence]).
 
the question doesn't ask should he be allowed to, it asks should he stay off the topic of marriage.

Yes it does.

My questions to you is should someone that is on his 3rd marriage and has committed adultery be allowed to lecture the general public on how marriage is a " Sacred tradition"

See?
 
when I say allowed I really mean should he be able to continue bashing gay marriage and not be called out by either the media or his political foes! Would be interested to see if Obama would bring the point up in a debate vs Newt.

The media and his political enemies should absolutely call him out for being a hypocrite on this.
 
when I say allowed I really mean should he be able to continue bashing gay marriage and not be called out by either the media or his political foes! Would be interested to see if Obama would bring the point up in a debate vs Newt.

Likely...Obama will not sink to such tactics (unless he gets really pissed off...and I hope he does)
 
Newt is against Gay marriage and has been very vocal about this throughout his campagin

He has? Perhaps you could show ad's ran by him or transcripts from debates where he was very vocal about this throughout his campaign? Frankly I've heard him comment relatively sparsely unless directly questioned about it on the subject.
 
He has? Perhaps you could show ad's ran by him or transcripts from debates where he was very vocal about this throughout his campaign? Frankly I've heard him comment relatively sparsely unless directly questioned about it on the subject.


this was the prop 8 video a few years ago Stop Imperial Judges...Support Proposition 8 - YouTube


Gingrich vows support for gay marriage ban

this was from December...There are plenty of other if you want me to post them or you could just google them yourself as they are not hard to find
 
this was the prop 8 video a few years ago Stop Imperial Judges...Support Proposition 8 - YouTube


Gingrich vows support for gay marriage ban

this was from December...There are plenty of other if you want me to post them or you could just google them yourself as they are not hard to find

"A few years ago" wasn't during the campaign. You said "throughout his campaign"

And thanks for the link that further reenforced what I stated....that he's not been "very vocal" about it throughout his campaign but rather has talked about it when it has been asked of him or its been brought up to him. In the case of your link, it was a response to a group in Iowa attempting to get him to sign a marriage pledge.

Talking about something and "being very vocal in his campaign" is two different thing entirely. The notion of it being very[/b] vocal is suggesting he's significantly talking about the issue during his campaign, in a way beyond what would be just normally vocal. Santorum would be someone very vocal about this kind of thing...he brings it up even when not asked about it, goes out of his way to tie it ot things, goes out of the way to make it a central issue for him. Newt is as vocal as any other general Republican candidate...when asked about it, he'll respond. To me that's not making it a "very vocal" part of his campaign anymore than Obama was making it "very vocal" that he was against gay marriage. He answered if it was asked of him, but he didn't make it a "very vocal" part of his campaign...frankly it doens't seem Newt is either.
 
Back
Top Bottom