LGBT GOP Guide: Ron Paul moves to head of the class, Huckabee, Romney fail
So, you're a proud member of the LBGT community, but one of the 25% that actually thinks enough to know socialism is a Very Bad Thing. What's a girl to do? I give you the Reverend Ryan Gay Guide to the Republican Runners. by The Right Reverend Doctor Pope Sir Ryan
(libertarian)
Friday, December 28, 2007
So, you're a proud member of the LBGT community, but one of the 25% that actually thinks enough to know socialism is a Very Bad Thing. What's a girl to do? Start by reading up on the stable of GOP presidential hopefuls. You might be suprised what you find out. As my own personal favor to whoever has so much free time they're actually reading my drivel, I give you the Reverend Ryan Gay Guide to the Republican Runners.
Mike Huckabee: Refers to homosexuality as an "attitude." Wants to amend the Constitution and a federal ban on adoption for gay couples. Led the effort to amend the Arkansas constitution to "define" marriage. If you are gay and you support this man, see a doctor right away. F-
Mitt Romney: You name a gay rights issue, he's been on both sides of it. Can we trust anything this guy says? F
Rudy Giuliani: Terrible in drag, even worse in his street clothes. He has spoken against New Hampshire's civil union law (the only one nationwide implemented without a court mandate) and supports "Don't ask, Don't tell." After wholeheartedly supporting the gay community as mayor, he now voices his opposition to same-sex marriage, but stops short of calling for a constitutional amendment. Sounds like your garden-variety Democrat to me. C-
Fred Thompson: Doesn't want to ban gay marriage per se, but wants to amend the Constitution to do away with that whole "Full Faith and Credit" nonsense that means if you're married in Vermont, you're married anywhere else in the country too. In other words, he wants to use the (no pun intended) back door. C
John McCain: "We are the party of Ronald Reagan, not Pat Robertson." The difference being? Opposes amending the US Constitution to ban gay marriage, yet supports amending the Arizona constitution to do just that. B-
Ron Paul: "True Christians, I believe, believe that marriage is a church function, not a state function. It's not a state function. I don't think you need a license to get married." Couldn't agree more. Don't Ask, Don't tell? “If there is homosexual behavior in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But if there’s heterosexual sexual behavior that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. So it isn’t the issue of homosexuality, it’s the concept and the understanding of individual rights. If we understood that, we would not be dealing with this very important problem.†A-
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 26
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of The Right Reverend Doctor Pope Sir Ryan only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
The Right Reverend Doctor Pope Sir Ryan is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Gee- there you go using common sense and logic again, Dr. Paul- don't you know we're trying to run a political campaign here?
From the above 'guide' I'd say the only candidate who is clear and consistent on this (and any other) issue is Ron Paul. The media should quit asking candidates how they FEEL about issues. Who Cares? The important question should be: What does the Constitution as the law of the land have to say about this issue? Or perhaps now that we've had almost 8 years of George Bush, the FEELINGS and whims of our 'dear leader' trump the Constitution.
 One more point. Why is it this issue (and others) that have little or nothing to do with Presidential powers or ability to influence them ONLY come up at election time? It is a valid issue, no doubt, but why only every 4 years? Perhaps to keep the candidates from having to weigh in on REAL issues that MATTER- like the economy, the war, corruption, government spending, abuse of power. You know- marginal issues that only affect every American deeply on an everyday basis.Â
Ron Paul's response on DADT was just more dodging of the question. If you watched the debate where this answer came from, you'll notice he did not say he would repeal DADT. What no one got from him, because it wasn't followed up, is what has to be the next part of his answer (since he does not support repealing DADT): Yes, disruptive homosexual behavior should not be tolerated, nor should disruptive heterosexual behavior. However, I believe all homosexual behavior is disruptive and most heterosexual behavior is not. Since he does not define exactly what sort of behavior he finds to be
My guess is that Ron (like many others) would a homosexual disruptive for acting exactly like a heterosexual. They're supposed to keep it "in the closet", you know.Â
