Conservative PAC Event says yes to Buttsex!!

[Danno 1,228]

So much for the Big Tent GOP.

Every tent has its limitations.

Truth is there are many groups have have no room in the left leaning tents and the fact that my questions up stream have gone un answered is evidence of that.

[Fandango 1,439]

I for one am very happy GOProud has been invited. I've always considered myself a moderate conservative, although I am beginning to identify as a Libertarian. I would say that the defining issue for that would be gay rights, as I staunchly support gay marriage.

I can, however, see the opposing point....if one of the tenets of being a 'republican' is defending the whole 'man woman marriage' aspect, then inviting GOProud is a bit curious, and a slap in the face to the organizations solely existing to 'defend' heterosexual marriage. It is like giving prolife democrat goups a voice.

I don't want to get into the whole republican vs conservative vs liberal vs democrat argument as it's too early in the morning.

But eh, it's time that we stop fighting over who does what to whom behind closed doors, and move onto REAL issues that effect us as a society.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Lisa C

[luckytxn 2,264]

They can be conservative in someways but not in the broad sense or definition of the word.

Why not. Are they not people also and can they not also have Conservative ideas and maybe even possible have more conservative views than many so called RINO's? So pretty much what you are saying is that someone can have the most Conservative views possible except one and because they veer from the party line in that one way they should be thrown out of the party. Now maybe just maybe there is a better way and that is to let them in and talk about it and see if there may possibly be a middle ground that can be made where both can be comfortable.

Now personally I find their sex practices distasteful but I am going to assume they are going to practice that sex act in the comfort of home and not at the convention in the open in front of everyone. I also find the idea of same sex marriage distasteful but if they want to then maybe we should talk about it. Marriage is really a moral issue and belongs more in a religious setting than a government function and if the government wants to have moral laws then we all need to talk about what is acceptable. I personally find same sex partners distasteful but I do like that they have chosen to try to be as normal as possible and want to marry and set up a household and be good citizens. I like that they are trying to live the American dream.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I for one am very happy GOProud has been invited. I've always considered myself a moderate conservative, although I am beginning to identify as a Libertarian. I would say that the defining issue for that would be gay rights, as I staunchly support gay marriage.

I can, however, see the opposing point....if one of the tenets of being a 'republican' is defending the whole 'man woman marriage' aspect, then inviting GOProud is a bit curious, and a slap in the face to the organizations solely existing to 'defend' heterosexual marriage. It is like giving prolife democrat goups a voice.

I don't want to get into the whole republican vs conservative vs liberal vs democrat argument as it's too early in the morning.

But eh, it's time that we stop fighting over who does what to whom behind closed doors, and move onto REAL issues that effect us as a society.

Why not. Are they not people also and can they not also have Conservative ideas and maybe even possible have more conservative views than many so called RINO's? So pretty much what you are saying is that someone can have the most Conservative views possible except one and because they veer from the party line in that one way they should be thrown out of the party. Now maybe just maybe there is a better way and that is to let them in and talk about it and see if there may possibly be a middle ground that can be made where both can be comfortable.

Now personally I find their sex practices distasteful but I am going to assume they are going to practice that sex act in the comfort of home and not at the convention in the open in front of everyone. I also find the idea of same sex marriage distasteful but if they want to then maybe we should talk about it. Marriage is really a moral issue and belongs more in a religious setting than a government function and if the government wants to have moral laws then we all need to talk about what is acceptable. I personally find same sex partners distasteful but I do like that they have chosen to try to be as normal as possible and want to marry and set up a household and be good citizens. I like that they are trying to live the American dream.

+1 (to both)

In Danno's view, them being gay precludes them from being a real conservative. For some, there are a few issues that they find so repugnant that it eclipses many other issues, regardless of their own self interest. I think this further illustrates that we need more legitimate political parties.

[Danno 1,228]

Why not. Are they not people also and can they not also have Conservative ideas and maybe even possible have more conservative views than many so called RINO's? So pretty much what you are saying is that someone can have the most Conservative views possible except one and because they veer from the party line in that one way they should be thrown out of the party. Now maybe just maybe there is a better way and that is to let them in and talk about it and see if there may possibly be a middle ground that can be made where both can be comfortable.

Now personally I find their sex practices distasteful but I am going to assume they are going to practice that sex act in the comfort of home and not at the convention in the open in front of everyone. I also find the idea of same sex marriage distasteful but if they want to then maybe we should talk about it. Marriage is really a moral issue and belongs more in a religious setting than a government function and if the government wants to have moral laws then we all need to talk about what is acceptable. I personally find same sex partners distasteful but I do like that they have chosen to try to be as normal as possible and want to marry and set up a household and be good citizens. I like that they are trying to live the American dream.

I think some are missing the who point of the topic here.

THis is not about rejecting random people because of what they do in their private lives, this is about rejecting political groups because their stated agenda is at odds with conservative social issues.

THere are other groups who perhaps are very conservative on social issues but also are inconsistent with conservative government philosophy.

All political factions have written and unwritten boundaries. THis is why Right to Life groups do not get the platform at any liberal gatherings.

[^_^ 5,021]

Bob Casey Jr. spoke during the 2008 Dem convention. He's pro life.

If you looked, you'd probably find pro choice people who spoke at GOP conventions as well. Like it or not, the kind of ideological purity you espouse is simply not of the mainstream.

[Danno 1,228]

I for one am very happy GOProud has been invited. I've always considered myself a moderate conservative, although I am beginning to identify as a Libertarian. I would say that the defining issue for that would be gay rights, as I staunchly support gay marriage.

I can, however, see the opposing point....if one of the tenets of being a 'republican' is defending the whole 'man woman marriage' aspect, then inviting GOProud is a bit curious, and a slap in the face to the organizations solely existing to 'defend' heterosexual marriage. It is like giving prolife democrat goups a voice.

I don't want to get into the whole republican vs conservative vs liberal vs democrat argument as it's too early in the morning.

But eh, it's time that we stop fighting over who does what to whom behind closed doors, and move onto REAL issues that effect us as a society.

Actually, most of these issues DO effect us as a society.... and as you can see it starts early.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxoqwnTqs_g

[Fandango 1,439]

Actually, most of these issues DO effect us as a society.... and as you can see it starts early.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxoqwnTqs_g

Here's the thing: you can support the 'right to marriage' as being only between a man and a woman, but that's not gonna make the gays 'go away'. There will still be 'gay pride' days...and get this...they might stop when we give them equal rights. What a concept!

I will admit, that I'm a little uncomfortable with schools talking to kids about gay/lesbians at the elementary school level...I think the issue of sexuality is a little too mature for elementary school kids...but then again, elementary school kids could have gay parents, so perhaps it's not an issue about sexuality, rather it's an issue of making kids feel 'normal' (whatever that is).

Either way, if I were a parent at that school, I would hope that this particular conversation would have been pre-empted with a permission slip.

[Danno 1,228]

Bob Casey Jr. spoke during the 2008 Dem convention. He's pro life.

If you looked, you'd probably find pro choice people who spoke at GOP conventions as well. Like it or not, the kind of ideological purity you espouse is simply not of the mainstream.

Conventions are a different animal. Once you have the nomination you of course reach out for broad support.

WE are talking about Pacs here, which are never broad in appeal.

BUt maybe you are right, maybe the Home-school voices have a place in the teachers union gathering.

[Danno 1,228]

Here's the thing: you can support the 'right to marriage' as being only between a man and a woman, but that's not gonna make the gays 'go away'. There will still be 'gay pride' days...and get this...they might stop when we give them equal rights. What a concept!

I will admit, that I'm a little uncomfortable with schools talking to kids about gay/lesbians at the elementary school level...I think the issue of sexuality is a little too mature for elementary school kids...but then again, elementary school kids could have gay parents, so perhaps it's not an issue about sexuality, rather it's an issue of making kids feel 'normal' (whatever that is).

Either way, if I were a parent at that school, I would hope that this particular conversation would have been pre-empted with a permission slip.

It's not ...and when parents complained, the judge ruled, the parent can't remove their child from the lesson and the school has no obligation to notify.

[^_^ 5,021]

... it's an issue of making kids feel 'normal' (whatever that is).

That is a big deal at the school my wife teaches. The student population there is predominantly lower income and urban, so it's not so much an issue of parents being gay as it is an issue of not all households having a mom and a dad. Some kids are being raised by single moms, some by grandparents, some by one grandparent. Almost none by a single dad (hmm). So the teachers are asked to not say anything that would imply that a "normal" family is one with a mom and a dad.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

That is a big deal at the school my wife teaches. The student population there is predominantly lower income and urban, so it's not so much an issue of parents being gay as it is an issue of not all households having a mom and a dad. Some kids are being raised by single moms, some by grandparents, some by one grandparent. Almost none by a single dad (hmm). So the teachers are asked to not say anything that would imply that a "normal" family is one with a mom and a dad.

I think they get that message already from television. Rather than denying what society considers as the ideal, we should be accepting all the various permutations as acceptable. Perhaps if they stop coddling kids so much, the youngsters just might surprise everybody and figure out all this stuff on their own.

[^_^ 5,021]

Perhaps if they stop coddling kids so much, the youngsters just might surprise everybody and figure out all this stuff on their own.

Agreed, generally speaking. That said, the school my wife teaches at is for young boys with emotional problems and behavioral issues. A big part of the practice is to avoid what they call 'trigger points' because no teacher wants to be the next to get punched in the face or kicked in the stomach. I've been suggesting that she quit this job for a while.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Agreed, generally speaking. That said, the school my wife teaches at is for young boys with emotional problems and behavioral issues. A big part of the practice is to avoid what they call 'trigger points' because no teacher wants to be the next to get punched in the face or kicked in the stomach. I've been suggesting that she quit this job for a while.

Future recruits, no doubt for the armed services. I wonder if judges still do what they did in my day, tell the kids, "Go to jail, or enlist," once they were old enough.

[^_^ 5,021]

Future recruits, no doubt for the armed services. I wonder if judges still do what they did in my day, tell the kids, "Go to jail, or enlist," once they were old enough.

I have no idea if they do or not. I do know that a few years ago the FBI busted a ring of bank robbers in this area and they were all graduates of the school my wife currently teaches at; it turned out one of the guys who used to come in to give them speeches about self worth from the point of view of an ex-gang member was actually still a gang member and used his job to recruit.