By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
EdHieron on 08 January 2012
Edit Thread
badgenome said:
EdHieron said:


1.  If Romney did win the Iowa Caucus, Mormons aren't any more in favor of gay marriage than Evangelicals.

2.  Most likely not, however, Gingrich, Romney, and Perry are almost indistinguishable from Santorum on the matter.

3.  Considering that the Evangelicals have gotten back in control of Congress and they passed such things as the NDAA (that Ron and Rand Paul opposed by the way) with little to no difficulty, it's certainly not beyond the realm of possibility that they could pass such an Amendment.

4.  It really depends upon how much power the Fundamentalists gain in the upcoming election.  If they gained control of boh houses of Congress and the Presidency they would probably dial the year back to 1692 in this country, so that anybody that didn't fully accept the literal truth of The Bible would probably find themselves standing on a scaffold with a noose around their neck or under a heavy rock.

You're being hysterical. How do evangelicals control Congress now, and what does being evangelical have to do with the NDAA passing with broad bipartisan support and being signed into law by a decidedly non-evangelical president? For that matter, what makes Ron Paul "better" on the issue of gay marriage than Rick Santorum? Santorum wants to prevent the federal government from recognizing gay marriage because he thinks such an arrangement is an affront to his Catholicism, while Paul wants to do so because he thinks the federal government shouldn't be involved in deciding such matters. I know whose instincts I'd trust more as president, but on this issue it amounts to a distinction without a difference, except for the fact that Santorum wants to amend the constitution the while Paul simply wants to keep federal courts from being able to rule on the constitutionality of DOMA. So, if anything, it seems that Paul wants to give DOMA the weight of an amendment without having to muster the votes to do so the proper way.

The Republicans the vast majority of whom are Evangelical in their leanings won one of Houses of Congress in the 2010 Elections (largely due to the Evangelical vote since 70% of the Christians that voted voted for Republican candidates ) and they're wanting to secure the other one this time around.  Now one of the major tenets that Republicans tend to agree upon is that they want to due away with the Department of Education.  Why do they want to do this?  Because they want a population that is basically only educated on "Good Biblical Principles" and that is too dumb to vote them out of office like they did in 2008 (the purpose of the religion that they subscribe to has always been to control the masses).  Now, the reason that only two Senators and only  one Republican (Rand Paul) voted against the NDAA when it passed Congress was that the overwhelming majority of them want to be able to have the same power that Obama received by signing the NDAA in the first place which in the Republican's case basically means locking up anyone that teaches evolution, supports gay rights, is in favor of abortion, or that knows the Bible is BS and says so.

Well, you've got the crux of the matter right there when you say Santorum considers gay marriage to be an affront to his Catholicism.  Catholicism was a religion started by the Roman Emperor Constantine because he wanted an easier way to keep the rabble in line than the constant wars he was having to wage against The barbarians.  If you can control how people think, then you don't have to put forth energy on forcing them to stay in line. just like the Senators that voted for the NDAA want to keep whatever part of the public they disagree with in line as the religion that the Republican ones almost all follow has been the world's longest lasting and most effective means keeping the barbarians / slaves in line dating all the way back to its creation in Ancient Egypt when the pharaohs convinced their slaves to haul massive stones up the sides of the pyramids ( with many of the slaves dying in the process) simply to immortalize the pharaohs in stone.

At any rate Paul doesn't want a Federal endorsement of gay marriage.  Meanwhile he does feel that State's should have the right to vote on the issue and determine if they want gay rights to be allowed in their states.  And on the other hand, Santorum wants to make a Federal Amendment against gay marriage (which would mean that it would be illegal in all States of the Union) based on the tenets of his bogus population controlling religion that also feels that an imaginary Sky Daddy is right by saying that women shouldn't be allowed to do what they want to with their own bodies and that has demonstrated in its history that those that don't worship their imaginary Sky Daddy should be stoned to death or set on fire.

I know which one of those two positions is best for the largest amount of people in the free world and it's not the one that is based on the tenets of a bogus Dark Ages religion.  Note:  this also goes for the tenets of Romney, Gingrich, Huntsman, and Perry as well whose principles and policies would stem from their own similar variations of that bogus Dark Ages Religion.

As Paul just said in the debate just now He's the one that's preaching the Gospel of Liberty and as I assert that means he's not advocating the religion whose sole purpose is controlling the slaves.