you're reading...
Patrick Callahan

It’s Time to Stop Worrying About “the Gays”

I’ve heard a lot of pundits say that we MUST change our positions on certain hot button social issues: abortion, immigration, etc.

I don’t really agree with that.

But there is one social issue that the Republican Party is wrong on, and that social issue is everything having to do with “the gays.”

Guys, we have to stop worrying about the gays. They’re going to go to their gay parties, hang out with their gay friends, and get gay married whether we like it or not. And frankly, this issue is hurting us.

Gays voted for Obama in droves, and the youth followed, with 67% of the youth vote going to the President last month. It was a landslide. It was horrible.

And look, it’s not like youth had any particular reason to be jazzed by Obama’s policies. Youth unemployment was sky high, and he hadn’t really come through on any major accomplishments, outside health care reform (if you can call that an accomplishment.)

But youth tend to be passive social liberals. They only care about issues they can comprehend, and “gay rights” is one of those issues. They don’t think critically on economic issues—the idea of creating jobs is still a magical concept that escapes many young people—but they do think with their hearts. And the Democratic Party did a great job of telling young voters that Republicans were heartless and bigoted. And it worked.

Folks, gay marriage isn’t some far left liberal agenda item anymore. The majority of Americans now favor it. It’s time for us to let go and move on. It’s time for government to get out of the bedroom—stop worrying about arbitrary things like the “sanctity of marriage”—and start focusing on real problems like skyrocketing unemployment and trillion dollar deficits.

We should lead on this issue, not follow, because it’s going to cost us long-term if we continue to drag our feet on this issue. Gay marriage doesn’t matter—it really doesn’t—so why are we making it an issue and creating single-issue voters out of it that will vote against us time and time again?

What do you think? This site is for Republicans of all shapes and sizes, so make your voice heard! Post in the comments and let us know your thoughts.

Patrick Callahan is the 25-year-old founder and editor of Callahan has managed and worked on multiple campaigns for strong conservatives in the Midwest. 

About these ads


71 thoughts on “It’s Time to Stop Worrying About “the Gays”

  1. So because Patrick Callahan makes a statement that we should quit “worrying about gays”. Does that mean then that Patrick Callahan has the pulse of the conservative movement and the direction we need to go. News Flash Patrick. Your not saying anything different than any other moderate/RINO in our party. Thats the part you and others dont “get”. It isnt that we “worry about gays”. The LARGE majority of conservatives believe in the sanctity/institution of marriage between a man and a woman. It isnt something we just “give up” because Patrick Callahan believes he’s “figured out” what we need to do to win elections. We are in a statelmate in our party. The Patrick Callahans, who think they know whats best for us, and true Conservatives. My guess . Conservatives leave the party before 2016.

    Posted by Rich | December 7, 2012, 6:58 pm
    • Any sex outside of Biblical marriage is mentally & physically damaging & spreads deadly diseases. That’s why God banned it. I mean, what next? Embrace pedophiles & beastiality? How can we condemn them if they claim like the homosexuals that they “were born that way”?

      Posted by Robert Smith | December 7, 2012, 8:56 pm
      • That’s what kills you guys. Bible thumping. There’s a reason founding fathers separated church and state. It’s to prevent batshit crazy Christians like you to dictate people who do not believe in their Santa Claus in the sky, how to live their lives.

        That’s what America is about. Live and let live.

        Posted by Thomas Paine | December 10, 2012, 5:40 am
      • this is not totally a Bible based issue, this is about the future of our children, grandchildren, great grandchildren. As homosexual behavior becomes more mainstream, more accepted (a major reason for the big push for homosexual marriage), there are other sexual activities following in the footsteps of the homosexual activists, trying to copy their methodology and rhetoric, to gain societal acceptance. Pedophiles are pressuring major mental health organizations into no longer classifying pedophilia as a mental illness, at the same time they are trying to overturn laws against pedophilia, as well as trying to get rid of age of consent laws, they are also trying to replace the term pedophilia with the word MAP, minor attracted person. They are also using the argument they were born this way, for obviously who would choose to live the life of a pedophile, and of course there is the tried and true, what right does anyone have to say who anyone can love. To those who say this is nothing to worry about, please consider that in 1970 homosexuals were a strange kind of sexual perversion, that you would occasionally hear about in jokes, today, we have homosexual indoctrination in public schools, we have homosexual weddings, we have many tv shows and movies with homosexual characters in leading roles, homosexual behavior is very mainstream, and very accepted. Can we say with any assurance, that the future we won’t see pedophilia in the same light?

        Posted by Ed Towle | December 12, 2012, 2:36 am
  2. You can change your position if you want, even favor the change as part of the platform of the national Republican Party. But as a Christian I am going to continue to love the gay person(s) but hate and stand against the gay agenda. Party politics can go to…well you know where!

    Posted by Brad | December 7, 2012, 7:01 pm
    • Brad, I totally agree with you, as a Christian, our country must come back into obedience with God and the Bible, so we can love the gay person(s) but stand against the gay agenda, and gay marriages.

      Posted by Darlene Slusher | December 7, 2012, 7:56 pm
    • @Brad – I agree wholeheartedly and I will stand with you Party politics don’t mean a thing when it comes to being obedient to our Lord. I cannot in good faith support the gay agenda, however that does not mean I will not continue to love and pray for those who have chosen this path in their life.

      Posted by John | December 7, 2012, 8:25 pm
    • A true thinker … As Christians we are COMMANDED to love others … anything less is disobedience and does not have a good outcome!

      Posted by Barbara Smith | December 7, 2012, 9:58 pm
    • COULDN’T agree more Brad

      Posted by David | December 8, 2012, 5:46 pm
      • I don’t want to preach to anyone but, on the other hand, I have no intention of accepting activities that are deplorable to me either. Unfortunately, gays and pro-abortion people are only interested in ENDORSEMENT of their values. I can ‘live and let live’ (and pray for them silently) but that is not acceptable to them, so who is it who is narrow-minded, intolerant, etc?

        Posted by Suzy Q | December 18, 2012, 10:58 am
  3. I agree the gays will do their thing, but, why must we encourage them to do so? Isn’t that tacit approval??

    Posted by Charlotte Smith | December 7, 2012, 7:02 pm
  4. Maybe I’m showing my age, but I totally disagree with this – I think Hollywood and the media have sold the American public a “bill of goods” on this issue — really, gays are still living shorter lives, have higher suicide rates, have terrible disease because of their lifestyle and generally have unhealthy lives… yet they are portrayed as “mainstream” and “happy” (e.g. Gay), and liberated. The health departments still have to notify partners when someone is diagnosed with HIV/AIDS or any STD and it is a tragedy that our youths are told this is all OK. Either we stick to the truth or we cave on everything and this is the future of our families we are callously throwing away with this issue.

    We are told to say “no” to smoking but not to anything else – it’s OK to smoke marijuana, it’s OK to sleep around, it’s OK to do everything else that might hurt us as long as it’s OK with Hollywood.

    Posted by Marge Storms | December 7, 2012, 7:03 pm
  5. I think the government needs to get out of marriage all together. Then this becomes a religious issue only. Make everyone fill out legal forms giving the “rights” that married people get. Also get government out of the bedroom and the womb. People have to make their own decisions and live with the consequences.

    Posted by Bill Lester | December 7, 2012, 7:04 pm
  6. I don’t have aproblem with gays having the rights of couples, I do have a problem with changing the meaning of marriage, they are not man and wife, they are gay and it isn’t part of the word marriage, …they can do everything, and have a union…marriage is between a man and a woman, not two of the same sexes…sorry, but to change that, is to take rights from me to give to someone else…I have the right to stand by marriage as it has always been stated, not changed bec someone else has a different idea what it should be….what we going to change the leopards name bec someone might not think it suits them bec they have spots. In the animal kingdom, they isn’t any gay, but we accepted it here, with all the same benefits as a man woman relationship, the only difference these days is the term marriage…and now they want that to…no where does it state between to of the same sex…its time to move on, let them have unions, but stop trying to take from me…your being selfish..not me. give an inch take a mile, and more…now minorities are running rip shod over majorities all the time, and now we have no voice…enough already be happy for what you have accomplished.

    Posted by Audrey J Simmons | December 7, 2012, 7:07 pm
  7. Gay marriage is a religious issue and very personal issue and the Fed has NO business sticking their nose in it. They need to stay out of people’s private lives. Good luck with THAT!

    Posted by Mark Lau | December 7, 2012, 7:09 pm
    • Hi, Mr. Callahan – I disagree that gay marriage doesn’t matter – it does – in any civilized society – it matters – you cannot condone gay marriage, and down the road will be gay adoption, and not face the consequences. All stable societies are based on mommy, daddy and children – it has nothing to do with “the bedroom” – this has to do with societal roles in our country……did you know that now in Maryland, where gay marriage has been legalized, when one goes to get their marriage license you are no longer able to check husband and wife but party 1 and party 2 – how can you say it doesn’t matter?

      Posted by Carol Pizza | December 7, 2012, 7:18 pm
  8. This article is just another indication of why this country is finished as a democratic republic. “Conservatives” are worried about how to win elections when it is clear that we have lost the culture war, thereby assuring us of constant losses in politics. I’m FINISHED with trying to make the Republican party an actual conservative party, especially when we have to change our principles and values just to win elections. With the kind of mentality this article projects, the Republican party will fade away to irrelevance. Let It Burn!

    Posted by Dave | December 7, 2012, 7:18 pm
  9. As a gay person, I want to vote republican but when a-holes like Rooster Scrotorum and Bat-girl Bachmann are busy spitting on me, I vote libertarian. When you let jack-wagons like the Family Research Council write the platform, no wonder 90% of gays are voting the other way. Sure- many are so brainwashed they would vote democrat if Hitler was running but gays are ~24-36 million votes. With the razor thin margins in the swing states, that makes a difference. If you can get 1/3 of that number, the GOP can win. Otherwise, the GOP will fade into obscurity.

    Posted by jamessavik | December 7, 2012, 7:35 pm
  10. I think this is THE issue of our time. I also think this issue will make or break our beloved nation. There is no way I can just rollover to whatever comes down the pike just so that we can say “Our side” won. I think this has been blown way out of proportion by the opposition. I don’t know anyone who goes around looking to take rights away from gay people or any other people for that matter but the left has sold the low information voting public that conservatives are waiting to pounce on them. Most people I know just want to mind their own business & live their lives.

    Posted by Tony | December 7, 2012, 7:37 pm
  11. Marriage should be a religious issue only. In the eyes of the government, all marriages should be changed to civil unions. Marriage should be a term used by religious persons of faith in reguards to their civil union. Get the government out of religious issues. Government crossed the line of Church/State when they started to treat and tax marriage couples different. In their defence, they never dreamed this day would come because homosexuality was shameful during their day and age. To end this silly and ignorant debate, just call everything a Civil Union when it comes to the Government. This is the only way to get people of religious convictions to back off this issue. People will not change the Biblical definition of a marriage, nor vote against their faith just because some folks think they should. Not everyone reverses their faith as easily as our current president just because it is not as popular as it used to be. So the only way to fix it is to take marriage out and insert civil unions across the board. If you want your relationship recognized as a marriage in the eyes of God, go to Church. If you are not religious, then go to a your local court house. As for the US Government, it is a Civil Union. Civil Union is a politically correct term. Far left is removing everything religious, why would they not be happy with changing a marriage to a civil union? Or are they just bound and determined to spit in the eyes of those who still have Biblical based faith?

    Posted by Mahlon L. | December 7, 2012, 7:40 pm
    • 100% agree with you

      Posted by Ray Conlan (@rconlan21) | December 7, 2012, 7:53 pm
    • Mahlon, I couldn’t have said it any better.

      Posted by Kathy | December 7, 2012, 7:56 pm
    • 100% agree. Marriage licenses were not required in most of the United States until after the Civil War. Mandatory marriage licenses, together with laws against cohabitation and extramarital sex, were a way to stop interracial couples. The basis of government involvement in marriage is racist to the core. Look it up. Time to get government out of the marriage business.

      Posted by Rich Weyand | December 7, 2012, 8:06 pm
    • I respectfully disagree. Calling marriage something else is as bad as the government redefining it. Here in MD the people just voted to allow homosexual marriage. That is ridiculous. The government has neither the authority or ability to change marriage into something it is not. If we hold an election to vote to start calling a monkey a horse does the monkey become a horse because we voted for it? Of course not. Marriage is what it is, the union of a man and a woman. If it’s two homosexuals it’s not marriage even if we call it that.

      Posted by gunsmoke3 | December 8, 2012, 4:47 pm
  12. Agree and disagree. Gov’t has already confiscated the term “marriage”. Marriage is a commitment between a man and a woman in the eyes of God! It has nothing to do with government. Fine, there are certain legal issues why the gov’t must track marriage. But, they should have their OWN term. Call it a civil union. The funny thing, the gay community would never accept this; because their TRUE motivation is to destroy the institution of marriage.

    Posted by Ray Conlan (@rconlan21) | December 7, 2012, 7:51 pm
  13. I’m a gay Republican. And I could really care less about gay marriage. You make compelling points, though. About 5% to 10% of the electorate are gays and their friends/family. And they can’t get past this one issue to see who Republicans really are. This issue is going to be resolved by the courts. And our party will lose. Why have such a bloodletting between now and then?

    I’m very conservative on issues like abortion. MANY gay men are anti-baby-killing. We want to give those kids homes! But as a case in point, when Richard Mourdock, the tea party’s US Senate candidate here in Indiana moved right on abortion, to say “God intended rape”… he became the left’s poster boy of what a tea-tard is. And he cost the GOP a reliably Republican seat, held for 40 years by Dick Lugar.

    Elections are decided by moderate, middle-of-the-road voters. No matter what ultra-conservative, private beliefs a candidate holds, he would be well served not to bring them public. It throws up a single, wedge issue that universally defines us to moderate voters.

    If we could table these divisive issues, they would cease uniting our opponents. And more people would realize our depth and substance. And have the epiphany GOP Gov. Susana Martinez and her husband had back when she was assistant DA to a Dem, which she shared at the GOP convention, “I’ll be damned, we’re Republicans.”

    Posted by Kendall Summers | December 7, 2012, 8:02 pm
  14. That is TOTALLY WRONG. No group is more vicious and implacably dedicated to crushing anyone who remotely disagree with it than the militant gay movement. It’s not just about marriage. It’s about the very right to hold, even in private, a biblical, traditional view of sexuality. They want anyone who doesn’t wholeheartedly embrace homosexuality driven from their jobs, their children to be taken away from them, to be declared mentally ill, to be laughed out of any forms of popular culture or politics. Does that sound paranoid? Of course it does. But it’s absolutely, demonstrably true. Right now they’re making it against the law to give a minor-aged child counseling for unwanted same-sex attractions. Next, they’ll be declaring the biblical view “psychological abuse” and removing children from homes that teach it. And about marriage? Already, the state of California has moved to loosen the definition of “parents” to more than two people, and France has removed any mention of “parents” from legal matters for fear of offending gays. It’s not about a “risk” of destroying the definition of marriage–thats already happened.

    Posted by Mark | December 7, 2012, 8:04 pm
  15. Church and state should have never been separated. Church should decide on this issue and Because we know which way they would vote, we know church and state will never be reunited.

    Posted by rebecah | December 7, 2012, 8:05 pm
  16. I hear you, but we can’t change our basic beliefs.
    We have lost this war, but are still in the battle.
    We may have to concentrate on other issues, but we must stand for our countries and Gods laws which are for our own good, well being and salvation.

    Posted by del | December 7, 2012, 8:05 pm
  17. We want less government in our Christian lives, but we want the government to be more involved in gay’s lives? I never did really understand this issue. I don’t care if gays get married or not. Why should I care unless they are friends of mine, in which case I might even go to the wedding. And how does that affect the “sanctity of marriage”? Probably 50% of Christian marriages end in divorce. And how many of those get remarried? According to the New Testament, that is considered adultery. Which sin is worse and who are we to judge anyone’s but our own. That is why most gays won’t set foot in our churches. Adulterers on the other hand…

    Posted by Tim Miller | December 7, 2012, 8:06 pm
  18. As a gay man, who is a Christian and a Constitutional, Pro-Life Conservative, I disagree with the left-wing’s co-opting of the whole gay “movement” and I vehemently disagree with the radical left-wing gays. I do not want the government in my bedroom any more than anyone else does. Likewise, as far as the whole “gay marriage” thing is concerned, frankly, I do not believe in it. I have been in one committed relationship for 38 years (our anniversary was Thanksgiving); my partner is 30 years my senior (he is 87 and in very ill health), and now I am providing daily caregiving duties and responsibilities. We provided for each other over all these years, and we have the necessary legal documents (Power of Attorney, Health Care Proxy, Living Will, etc.) in place where we have all the “rights” of a married couple, without being married.

    And when conservative candidates/politicians utter a verbal faux pas, my skin is certainly thicker than to be so insulted that I would not vote for them. It is a matter of really getting to know us; we are people too, and we have, for the most part, the same wants, needs, and desires as anyone else.

    I wish peace and happiness to all in this joyous season. God bless.

    Posted by seanomni | December 7, 2012, 8:25 pm
  19. Sorry Patrick, but you’re way off the mark on this one. This is a HUGE issue with true conservative voters, and the silent Chick-fil-A “protest” earlier this year should have been a clue. Furthermore, I can’t believe you’re so short-sighted that you don’t see this is just one more chisel chipping away at our First Amendment – more specifically, religious rights in this country. When the federal government decides to “re-define” marriage, what do you think is going to happen to the first person (business owner, religious clergy, etc.) who refuses to in any way cooperate with such act because it goes against their religious beliefs? I implore you to research Elaine Huguenin and her business Elane Photography and then come back to this forum and tell us that we need to “stop worrying about the gays”. You’re buying into the same crap that the other side is throwing out. I would venture to say that many of us conservative Christians have gay friends, family members, etc. who we love dearly. It’s not the people we are against. It’s the constant erosion of our freedoms that scares the hell out of us. There is a very clear overt attack on Christianity in this country and the gay marriage issue is just one more weapon in the progressives’ arsenal to destroy it.

    Posted by Sheri | December 7, 2012, 8:31 pm
  20. I think Patrick is right. We need to get over the Gay thing. And since most folks don’t like the rich, then we need to get over the “no raising of taxes on the rich” thing. And since most folks believe in the social welfare system, we need to get over that and stop opposing that. And since a good portion of people believe in the legalization of Marijuana, we need to get over opposing that as well. And ditto for Abortion, and since the Republicans lost the election, we might as well get over the Repulbican party too. I guess if we are going to hold a position, based soley on what “others”,
    or “youth” or “liberals”, etc. think, then we never will have any solid principals worth fighting for! You don’t give up on something simply because others believe it to be wrong. If it is worth fighting for, whatever it is, it is worth fighting for even if we are losing.

    Posted by Jim | December 7, 2012, 8:37 pm
  21. I am gay and a conservative. I don’t want anyone limiting my freedoms. the federal/central government needs to stay out of this issue. it is like all marriage an issue that the states. shoild decide upon unless the Constitution is amended. I would like to see more states allow same sex martiage

    Posted by james Gansrow | December 7, 2012, 8:48 pm
  22. I like the article but it does not display other factors that need to be addressed.

    Posted by Americantruth Detector | December 7, 2012, 8:59 pm
  23. The problem we have here is that people care what the government thinks. I personally don’t care what the government thinks. How the government defines marriage doesn’t matter. Marriage takes place in a church with ones family and loved ones. It is beautiful and holy. But if gays want to have a piece of paper from the government that says they are married, let them. It is still not my definition of marriage nor that of my church and that is all that matters.

    Posted by Tim | December 7, 2012, 9:04 pm
  24. I am a Christian, and take my faith very seriously. Not just some guy who goes to church every once in a while and then clubs people over the head with the ten commandments. I read the Bible, pay attention and try to apply it to my life. My thoughts on this issue is that most Christians have become so unloving towards those who sin differently than they do that they have lost the moral high ground here. Christians should be so loving to the hurt and broken that others want to be more like us on their own. Our goodness and helpfulness should shine brightly throughout the world as givers of our time, money and effort, and in our relationships so much that those who are following a homosexual lifestyle, and those who are sexually promiscuous decide to change their behavior because they want we have. Every person needs us to carry out Christ’s work more than they could possibly imagine, and are benfitting from the bold, and daring Christians of the past in ways they will never learn unless we are willing to educate, inform, and win their hearts for Christ in a loving manor. No Christian should be shouting the ten commandments at others until they have memorized the Beatitudes and the sermon on the mount (Matthew 5 through 7). No one should judge others for their sins until they can do so with the kind of love that Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 1-3.

    Posted by Craig | December 7, 2012, 9:45 pm
    • I guess to add my view regarding the Government definition, I don’t see any reason why the Feds or the States should be legislating definitions and laws regarding how people relate to one another. Get the Government out of the debate, let people make their own decisions, but then let us Christians live an example that others want to follow.

      Posted by Craig | December 7, 2012, 9:50 pm
    • As a Christian I mess up/sin way toooooo much. BUT I am broken hearted when I do & i repent & ask for forgiveness & try to not do it again. Do I succeed? Sadly no….it is a “life” process. BUT those taking part in the mess up/sin of homosexuality are not repentant……not broken hearted…..they are demanding it be tolerated & now even more fully accepted.

      Posted by jlc | December 8, 2012, 4:15 pm
  25. I could not disagree more. This election cycle we did not talk about moral issues. It was all about the economy. 3,000,000 republicans that voted for McCain stayed home. Why? McCain and Romney are both moderates. What was the difference? Sarah Palin. She talked about moral issues and she was conservative and could talk about it with passion. She fired up the base like no one since Ronald Reagan. If we stop talking about moral issues we will stay in the minority.

    Posted by gunsmoke3 | December 7, 2012, 11:52 pm
    • Well said! Its amazing that a moderate/RINO would espouse something that we know, would have made very little difference in the election. How does the author of this thread know that gay marriage would have made even an iota of difference? This is just ANOTHER attempt by a RINO to tell conservatives what we need to do, to “attract more voters”. Such blather! Lets face it. The message didnt resound with enough voters. Bottom line. Romney didnt have anything different to say than Mccain did in 08!

      Posted by Rich | December 8, 2012, 12:16 am
    • And she is also the one to claim that Christine O’Donnell was the “true conservative” in the Delaware race. The same Christine O’Donnell that can’t keep her own finances straight let alone be competant enough to handle a budget of Trillions of dollars.

      The same Sarah Palin who further isolates the party on the right on the issues that matter in states. Such as unions, I grow sick of seeing people like the man who ran 4 times as a “conservative” bash minimum wage laws. Anyone who thinks minimum wage and unions are an issue with “growth” needs to revisit early 20th century and see if they agree with John D. Rockefeller when he stated “you see a monopoly, I see capitalism” when he went before the court in the 1911 case Standard Oil vs United States (1911).

      If you like to go back to those times of no safety net, no safety standards at the workplace, do away with standardize work schedules, and the countless other things brought forth in the last century because of some rednecks in Kenova, West Virginia go ahead but don’t expect to be very welcomed by average people.

      Posted by Slyder | December 9, 2012, 8:32 pm
      • At least Christine O’Donnell was spending her own money. You think we lost because of opposition to minimum wage laws? Wages should be set by the market not the government. It’s ok to have a safety net but the way it’s being done causes more dependence and the safety net has become a hammock. The Rockefellers were never conservative so I don’t know what your point is by bringing him up.

        Posted by gunsmoke3 | December 10, 2012, 1:46 am
      • Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

        Posted by Slyder | December 10, 2012, 3:44 am
      • As you can see… the federal “safety net system” is clearly a hammock that has one giant problem.. it can’t be funded and people are taking advantage of it. What’s the Constitutional right for the government to have this “safety net system”? None.. Let the states handle it how they wish… you will see that there will be 50 experiments of Osha, Welfare, Medicaid, medicare, etc… LEAVE IT TO THE STATES.. who said eliminate? Are you listening to the liberals a little too much?

        Posted by KingRichard | December 11, 2012, 8:41 am
      • Gunsmoke- Read a history book sometime you might understand my point in mentioning Rockefeller.

        The earlier response about minimum wage laws came straight from the mouth of a number of “tea party” candidates such as John Raese and Joe Miller among others. These are the types that Sarah Palin has endorsed and have painted the party into a corner. Need I also bring up the fact we had candidates this past time who made the election about “women’s rights” because they tried to explain “legitimate rape” was and that “rape was a gift from God”, because they are idiots. It got every Republican/conservative painted in a disgusting light.

        Leaving things like safety standards to the states is what brought such great American events as…
        The Battle of Blair Mountain
        Jim Crowe Laws
        Homestead Steel Strike

        These events are why the Federal Government got involved in the first place.

        Why do you think so many manufacturing jobs have gone to Vietnam, China, India, etc where they have no rules in place? Like I said before if you want to work like that feel free to, I have no desire to see these practices return.

        And yes the safety net needs fixed, but so many of the states are already practically bankrupt that I would expect them to do away with it unless it was federally mandated leaving many hard working people, who lost their jobs because of the economy, Sh*t Out of Luck.

        Posted by Slyder | December 11, 2012, 3:05 pm
  26. I am all for the civil union definition when it comes to the government. Nobody needs the government telling them they are married or not. For legal reasons we need to register our union but we don’t need to ‘define’ it as marriage. I believe this is the only answer to the conflict and puts a clear line of separation between the state and the church. Without it, the agenda will march forward (even if the “marriage battle” is won) into our homes, our churches, our businesses, and (worst of all) our thoughts and beliefs.

    Posted by TommyToes | December 8, 2012, 12:06 am
    • >> Nobody needs the government telling them they are married or not.

      Actually you do. You have no idea of what a marriage license means until you don’t have one. Then you can’t see your dying partner in the hospital, need a lawyer to do the most mundane legal tasks and get taxed as individuals.

      Posted by jamessavik | December 8, 2012, 1:03 am
      • That is because the tax code is too complicated. If I was in a seat of power there would be no advantage in being married vs. being single. I would also make it so that you could see your dying partner. The government only does these things because we as citizens allow it to.

        Posted by Tim | December 8, 2012, 1:25 am
  27. Gays are a small part of our population. I know that their way way of life has many legal road blocks enjoyed by the union of a man and woman. Do we as a party have the right to block their legal rights? It is not biblically correct; but, it is a thing between them and their GOD….not me and my GOD.

    Posted by Gena Farley | December 8, 2012, 3:45 am
  28. The issue doesn’t matter only if family doesn’t matter. I

    Posted by Phil | December 8, 2012, 3:52 am
  29. Horse feathers. I do not choose to support in anyway something The Word of God…BIBLE…calls sin & an abomination. America shouldn’t either. We should stopndoing things that fly in the face of God. GOD WILL NOT BE MOCKED!

    Posted by jlc | December 8, 2012, 3:43 pm
  30. I am a christian. I do believe that a man lying with another man is a sin. I also believe that when you lie to your boss at work on why you need a day off you are also sinning. I believe that one is no worse than the other in the eyes of God.

    What I find interesting about this debate is that here we are again looking to the federal government to get involved in something it has no business being involved with. No matter which way the supreme court rules, we all both gay and heterosexuals will again be giving up a freedom to the federal government. This issue should most certainly be left to the states and our federal government should inturn respect the state laws in regards to tax credits for married people which is currently the only legal aspect that federal government has any say over. If the state recognizes gay marriage then give them the tax credit if it doesn’t then don’t.

    Now to address the religous nature of this subject. #jlc says “Horse feathers. I do not choose to support in anyway something The Word of God…BIBLE…calls sin & an abomination. America shouldn’t either. We should stop doing things that fly in the face of God. GOD WILL NOT BE MOCKED!’ To him I would say this. What things do you do that fly in the face of God. When you do those things are you “mocking God”. Through his Aposotle Paul, God says the we all fall short of the glory of God. Through his son Jesus he says that we should first pluck the the log from our own eye before we try to remove the splinter from our brother’s eye. @jlc it is not for you to tell America what we should or shouldn’t support. However, in saying this I do support your right to not support it. My question to you jlc is if we make this sin illegal, should we make all sin illegal. Keep in mind that God does not have a ranking of Sin. If we do then what would you and I be thrown in jail for.

    To those that say this will weaken our family structrure and lend to the moral decline in this country, I call BS. We should not put the moral weakening of our country on anybody but ourselves. We elect our leaders, we choose what to watch and what to not watch on television, we are in charge of our kids. Never once in the Bible when Isreal continually turned away from God did God ever put the fault on the government of Isreal. The fault always lies where it should and that is with the people. I refuse to let my moral judgement be left to political whim. I will believe a Sin is a Sin despite the government. I will strive not to Sin despite of the government. I will teach my child the difference between right and wrong despite the government and I say to you that if all of us thought that way then our moral fiber would certainly be in tact. Keep in mind that the bible is against divorce and sees it as an immoral act and yet the segment of our population that has the highest divorce rate can be found in church memborship with over 50%. I don’t say this to be preachy, I certainly have my own sins that I battle with, but I certainly don’t allow the government to set my moral compass. If the federal government decides to recognize gay marriage then it will not effect my view of it one way or the other. The weakening of our family structure occured long before the issue of Gay marriage came up. Divorce and children born out of wedlock are the two biggest contributers in the decline of the family unit. To be completely honest with you my son was born out of wedlock. His mother and I are not together. He got lucky though in that she found a man that has been very good to him and they do have a strong family unit. My wife and I are also strongly married. I talk to him freely about the mistakes that both his mother and I have made and hope that he does not repeat them. If we are to regain the strength of the family unit than it must start with our kids. We should not say that divorce is ok or that having a child out of wedlock is ok. It is not, it does effect the child. It has effected my son. We should be able to be brutally honest with ourselves and our children if we want to return to a morraly strong country that centers around the family. We should stop looking for someone else to blame other than ourselves.

    Lastly, I will say this. With Obama Care the governent is now intruding on my relationship with my doctor. Through minimum wage and payroll taxes it intrudes on my relationship with my employer. I would like to think that we can draw the line at my relationship with my wife and with God. I think the government and I are getting a little too close at that point. Now that the supreme court is bringing up this issue I pray that it’s decision will be that it has no authority in this matter. However I feel that with both sides looking to the federal government to define marraige, we have already lost no matter which side of the subject you are on. Consider the possibility that if we allow the government to define marraige then it will also have the means and authority to change that definition when it sees fit. Both sides need to consider this and both sides should simply say no to this. Our founders believed that a people must be strong in order to maintain our constitutional republic. The last strong generation that we have had was the generation of WWII. Since then each generation has grown weaker and now we are so weak that we are looking to the federal government to define marraige. So lets look at the score card. The federal government is involoved with our retirements, our wages, our healthcare, and now we want them involved with our marraiges. Folks, there just isn’t that much left to give them.

    Posted by Chad Merritt | December 8, 2012, 6:40 pm
  31. Whatever happened to every individual’s ability to have a direct relationship with God and who made anyone else responsible for everyone else’s right to dictate to the others? You people sound like wanna be Popes. When this debate began the party and the church took a very difficult position to defend and as time has progressed just like other issues in time it has been decided by people. Just like the war on drugs, prohibition, and secession it is a losing battle.

    My personal suggestion leave the concept of marriage to church and make all government sanctioned unions civil unions. Mark 12:17 “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s”. The rights they seek are given unto man by man, not God.

    Matthew 7:3-5

    3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

    Not to mention Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

    Posted by Slyder | December 9, 2012, 7:45 pm
  32. The author of this article is soooooo wrong, it isn’t funny and it’s sad he has a skewed idea as to there being a majority who don’t care about the issue of homosexual marriage, which is an agenda of the radical Left, being pushed so as to remove biblical values, according to God’s Word found in the Bible, from our society. The issue is only the starting gate for furthering the teaching of homosexuality relationships in our schools, that is very well documented by groups such as Mass Resistance and other Traditional Marriage information groups. One of the groups took out ads before the election, but the ads were banned or suppressed, by the Mainstream Media and not sure that they ran on conservative media either, just before the recent marriage votes. Thus, they were unable to get their full message as to this Left-wing agenda’s effect on children being indoctrinated in the various schools that has been a real nightmare for parents, who were not given advance notice and were banned from removing their child from the indoctrination into homosexuality classes. They have much to say about this issue as do parents whose children have been forced in Massachusetts schools to go through homosexual indoctrination classes that are evil, despicable and go totally against what God has to say about the issue. The right to “Gay”/Homosexual marriage is only the tip of the ice berg on the Left’s radical agenda, and the Republican Party would be very unwise to ignore the issue, as the majority of voters whenever given the opportunity to vote on it have chosen to “Just Say No!”

    Posted by newsnviewsjd | December 9, 2012, 7:45 pm
  33. I may have the concept of this site. I was under the impression this was a site for fresh, new , conservative ideas, not stale, old, RINO talking points???!!

    Posted by Rich | December 10, 2012, 2:30 am
  34. Yeah, I think Patrick has been smoking something… I am not sure what state you live in, but you must be severely confused… the purpose of the “Gay Marriage” movement is to destroy the church, plain and simple. When “the gays” (as you put it), where asked before the election what their top 10 issues where for the election… gay marriage was nowhere… That’s right, gays don’t care about gay marriage… What I think is important to distinguish.. is Civil Union from Marriage. Marriage is in church, and here Gay Marriage should be prohibited forever… but I don’t care if every state allows civil unions for people, gays, pets, dead poets, etc…

    Posted by KingRichard | December 11, 2012, 8:34 am
    • Patrick, did you ever consider perhaps that the reason the young vote, voted for Obama, is because most of them are fucking idiots? Good Lord, do they know how many states we have? Do they know any US or Soviet history? Nothing… indoctrinated with communism from kindergarten, and then graduate, barely knowing how to read or write… we should look at how THEY vote and go after them? The Uneducated? Good Lord Patrick.. .I don’t think you’re little site will survive very long…

      Posted by KingRichard | December 11, 2012, 8:46 am
  35. To claim same-sex marriage doesn’t matter is to expose ones lack of concern for society and utter ignorance of its adverse affect on young child and our society.
    Once marriage is redefined that opens the door for more “inclusiveness” of other abnormalities. Yes being homosexuality is abnormal, that does not mean it is bad or evil. Then Muslims and Morons will want their love of multiple wives allowed and very young brides for Muslims. The changes are endless and none good.
    The left will run with this changing all school books that mention marriage to include homosexual marriage, messing with the minds of young children as they are sexually developing. As if they are confused and frustrated enough already!!
    Then there is adoption. All things considered equal, child are better off with a mother and and father, NOT 2 moms or 2 dads. Each parent brings something unique to a child and family which will be lacking in a same-sex marriage. And children deserve the best family they can get.
    Patrick Callahan’s simple minded focus is wrong, There is much more to this and at stake than just giving into the activist gay movement to get rid of the issue. Our children and society are at risk.

    Posted by Richsurfin | December 12, 2012, 2:35 am
  36. It’s not just about “gay marriage is wrong”…it is about having a moral compass! What about the gay lifestyle leads to a moral compass? How can you say that a moral compass doesn’t matter? I am 24 and the majority of the people I go to college with and associate with view gay marriage as just disgusting…our message of protecting the sanctity of marriage can reach my generation, but what happens is we fall to often for the liberal characterization of “Republicans are homophobes and stuck in the past” that comes from places like Colbert, Stewart, and MSDNC! Just like what they do if we go after a black democrat for his policies…we become ‘racist’…

    We have to get our message across that it goes beyond name calling, and digs at the core. Which is redefining the moral compass that we lost during the ’60s. Ever notice how television shows prior to the ’60s always had a “moral of the story”? Shows like Leave it to Beaver, the Rifleman, Gunsmoke, Bonanza, Andy Griffith…well after the ’60s that changed (the root cause was the Vietnam war…it changed America socially).

    Bottom line: we need to articulate our message for a moral compass to where it goes beyond petty names like ‘homophobe’ and ‘stuck in the past’…the democrats are using those names just like they have used ‘racist’…it’s all they’ve got!

    Posted by AdmiralKirk | December 12, 2012, 5:18 am
  37. Gay Marriage isn’t the issue. Marriage is the issue. Where in the Constitution is the authority given to the government to define Marriage? By reducing Marriage down to being a “piece of paper” instead of a Covenant, we are watering down the institution of marriage just as much as redefining it would. By recognizing Marriage, this government gives tax incentives for those who are married. This effectively states that we, as Conservatives, do not believe that the institution of marriage is strong enough to survive within our society without government subsidies. If we show that we have no faith in the institution while continuing to reduce Marriage to a simple contract, why should any citizen believe that the institution of Marriage is worth the fee the Marriage license costs?

    Posted by KMcLovin | December 12, 2012, 6:40 am
    • You make some good points but I think the tax code should encourage traditional marriage. You hit the nail on the head because the government has neither the authority or ability to redefine marriage. That is like trying to redefine what a giraffe is. It is what it is and no matter how many laws we pass to redefine a giraffe it’s not going to change the giraffe.

      Posted by gunsmoke3 | December 18, 2012, 4:34 pm
  38. Citing a Wikipedia article that contains polls that have an error which could swing the majority against instead of for an argument is no way to win an argument.

    Posted by Kev | January 11, 2013, 7:49 pm
  39. Should we just give up our rights to own a gun to because after all there just guns. Or how about our stance on abortion? After all its just tissue. Shoot why dont we just give up being conservatives and register as democrats?

    Posted by Bill | April 30, 2013, 4:15 am
    • Let’s look at reality regarding the issue of homosexuality. As homosexuality becomes more accepted and mainstream nobody is asking or thinking about what other types of sexual activity are people born to engage in? Back in the 60s when I grew up, homosexuality was never really talked about, and society tried to discourage people from engaging in this activity, Today it is very mainstream, it is taught in our schools, we have homosexual themed TV shows and movies, we even have homosexual marriage. Just what will our children and grandchildren have to deal with? could our grandkids have to deal with the emotional turmoil of having to see their ten year old son or daughter walk out the door to go on a date with a fifty year old man for after all people are born pedophiles, and what right do we have to condemn or judge them, and what right do we have to say who anyone can love or what they do in the privacy of their bedroom?

      Posted by ed | April 30, 2013, 2:34 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 42,327 other followers

%d bloggers like this: