Would the Dens elect someone who believes.......

No it is highly relevant as in which party can get their base out.

At this point yes I think they will.

Evolving for the sake of evolving, what if a pro-gay marriage person evolves and gets enlightened and drops that support? But the question here is after such an unequvicial statement by someone who should be roundly grounded in their moral beliefs by the time they are a 50 year old adult and is so well aware of this historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time, isn't this just phony political expediency?

I'm certainly not saying it couldn't happen. For instance Obama starting to attend a racist bigoted church in Chicago for political expediency, or do you believe he shared all those beliefs?

 

Votes are votes, and whoever receives more wins.

Amongst the objectives conducive to victory are 1) motivating one's own party rank and file, 2) attracting independents, and 3) attracting cross-over voters.

Of course, each American is free to choose whichever candidate he favours when actually casting his ballot in any general elections, regardless of party affiliation.

No, I'm certain that you are delusional if you actually entertain such a notion.

You may want to make contact with reality by asking some normal folks your question, "Would you vote to nominate a homophobe?"

Most Americans have progressed admirably concerning such issues, and are far more disposed to support candidates who have similarly progressed.

Even the recently-installed Pope, the leader a billion Christians, expressed that evolving, enlightened attitude when he addressed homosexuality in the humble phase: "Who am I to judge?"

Homophobic politicians may still thrive in Russia or in Islamic theocracies, but not in present-day America.

 

Copernicus was never ex communicated

 

don't put words in MY mouth. I wouldn't call anyone who made that statement a homophobe based upon that statement alone... conservative or liberal.

 

Yes and Democrats getting their Democrat base out and Republicans getting out their Republican base is key to winning.

It's not a term I use, it is a term the Democrats use.

Most conservatives I know have "enlightened" attitudes, they like Hillary expressed simply think marriage is between a man and a woman, you know as she said based on timeless history.


Even the recently-installed Pope, the leader a billion Christians, expressed that evolving, enlightened attitude when he addressed homosexuality in the humble phase: "Who am I to judge?"

So in 2000 was she a homophobe?

 

The what is the distinction you make between conservatives who oppose gay marriage and liberals like Hillary? The ONLY issue I know of is whether marriage is between a man and a woman. Heck all one has to do here is state that belief and that belief alone and be branded a homophobe. In fact the entire Republican party is branded as homophobic for that one issue alone, gay marriage.

So what made Hillary NOT a homophobe back then?

 

Whether you're a Democrat, you obviously used the term you now claim not to have used.

Maybe you have since evolved in both respects, but it really looks as if you want to snivel about Hillary, and cannot find a more credible ploy.

You need not support her candidacy if doing so would upset you, but you'd be better off finding an alternative that you can support.

It would afford you the novelty of saying something nice about someone.

 

again... Don't put words in my mouth, (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*). I have never called a conservative a homophobe for opposing gay marriage. Take your argument somewhere else.

 

Why would a Dem tell those kinds of lies and why would I vote for him if he did?

 

Ahhh, you know you aren't smart enough to fool anyone except yourself.

Because you are taking things that were said in the past, by people who have changed their opinion since then, and claiming that their new position on the issue doesn't count, and then comparing them to people making those statements today.
Want to see who you fooled, check out the mirror....

 

I always hated spicy food as a kid. Would throw fits if my mom made something that burned my mouth.

Now I like it as an adult.

Go figure.

 

No I'm asking those who support her if they apply the term equally.

No I want an honest discussion of her and a total vetting which the Democrats will be desperate to avoid.

You need not post the emotional trollings.

, but you'd be better off finding an alternative that you can support.

Why do you assume I don't say nice things about people? But do give me something nice to say about this particular person?

But you refuse to answer, was she a homophobe and if not why not? When anyone on the right who would voice such a position would be labeled as one.

 

I haven't put words into your mouth, I am plucking them out of it. Recall Chick-Fil-A which had the same position and belief as Hillary and you calling them bigoted and homophobic? Hmmm recall that? I didn't put those words into your mouth did I?

Recall when you referred to churches that have the same positions as she expressed as being filled with homophobes? Forgotten that one too?

So spare me the faux outrage.

So why are they homophobic and Hillary not?

- - - Updated - - -

What does that have to do with marriage and history since the beginning of time and morals?

 

My point was that people can have differing ideas at different points in their lives. We are not set in stone. Even you. As you've lived and learned and grown you have changed as a person. That's what living, learning, and growing do.

As for marriage history, I honestly couldn't care less. The history doesn't change so if that's what you like, you'll always have it right there waiting for you to remember it. I'm much more interested in what marriage is now and will be in the future. I don't feel like I belong to some kind of member's only special club because I happened to be born with the acceptable orientation and I don't need the law to exclude people to feel that my marriage has value. The value it has is the sum of what my wife and I create and grow within it. I would honestly feel like it was worthless if I ever felt the slightest bit threatened by other people getting married. That's why I've never once understood all the prolific talk about the sanctity of marriage and how SSM somehow threatens it.

I don't know if you're married sir, but if you are, or were, can you honestly tell me that you would feel that it somehow meant less if two gay folks also got a legal marriage? I honestly don't understand how the worth of someone's marriage could be so tied up in other people that aren't a part of it. Unless we're back living in medieval times and people are still getting betrothed to seal alliances and fortunes, the worth of a marriage should be determined solely by the people in it. Seems like a good system if ya ask me.

 

You are failing miserably at trying to make your point, whatever that is. Homophobe? Where did you pull that from?

While I haven't followed Hillary that closely lately, my bet is that she is in favor of marriage equality.

However, I'll almost certainly guarantee you one thing. Unless some non-kook (like Jeb Bush) is your party's nominee, she'll get my vote. And she'll get the majority of America's vote, as well as the electoral college vote and will be elected POTUS.

 

I couldn't care less what Hillary thought about Gay Marriage in 2000 or what she thinks about it now, as I couldn't care less about Gay Marriage one way or the other. I do think that one of the worst things that could happen to the USA is to have a Republican elected in 2016 and that the Republican attitude to Gay Marriage now is one of the many reasons I feel that way. I also believe that Hillary is about the closest thing to an unbeatable candidate the Democrats can nominate, and if she doesn't run we might indeed lose to one or another of the really dangerous kooks the Republicans are putting up and backing with the nearly unlimited resources of the corporate fascists that actually control the Republicans now.

 

Maybe they wouldn't mind if that candidate didn't propose using that view as a way of calculating how much they're going to tax you.

 

OK was Hillary a homophobe when she said marriage is between a man and a woman and he position is based on history from the beginning of time and her moral beliefs?

- - - Updated - - -

Dodge noted.

 

I don't think she was a homophobe for simply believing that, and she certainly can change her opinions as she moves through life. We all can.

 

What is the distinction you make between what Republicans believe about marriage being between a man and woman and what Hillary stated as her unequivocal belief in 2000?

 

Yet you tagged others as homophobes for holding the same belief. Care to reconcile that.

 

So was she a homophobe when she believed like conservatives and most Republicans that marriage is between a man and a woman, if not why not?

 

I don't know what her personal feelings are on the subject. I don't think it's homophobic if you're strictly arguing against SSM on those grounds and you haven't said anything disparaging about gay folks that would give the impression that your opposition is based on subjective discomfort. Most times though, you can find the people that are defending marriage on those grounds are also talking about how being gay is wrong, disgusting, against God, unnatural, etc etc etc. That's evident even on this forum.

But it's also a terrible terrible argument. She was wrong to use that as a justification for maintaining marriage discrimination(because it's a really dumb argument) and I'm glad she's changed her mind and is looking forward instead of backward.

 

The quote expressed them unequivocally as she claimed them to be in 2000.

Then why does the left paint anyone who does as homophobic but not Hillary?

I know of few conservatives or Republicans who speak disparaging of gay folks except some of the gays who march in public parades nearly naked flaunting their sexual acts and expect everyone to be "tolerant" of such acts.

Simply supporting defense of traditional marriage gets you labeled, just look at Chic-Fil-A.

Ahh Hillary clearly stated moral and religious grounds.

So again if those on the right are painted as homophobes for the same, historical, moral and religious beliefs why not Hillary?

 

It is not so much simply holding the view as it is the virulence with which others hold it and denigrate those - especially gays - who want to see the laws changed.