Is the GOP Finally Getting Hip to Gay...

Is the GOP Finally Getting Hip to Gay Marriage?

There are 83 comments on the WHLO-AM Akron story from Apr 17, 2014, titled Is the GOP Finally Getting Hip to Gay Marriage?. In it, WHLO-AM Akron reports that:

Just as the Nevada GOP drops its opposition to same-sex marriage, a group of young conservatives is launching a campaign to change anti-gay language in the national party platform.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WHLO-AM Akron.

First Prev
of 5
Next Last
Chance

Grove City, PA

#1 Apr 17, 2014
Hope they do. It would certainly enhance the rise of a politically unambiguous independent (third) party.
hi hi

Lancaster, PA

#2 Apr 17, 2014
I truly believe most of this politics is manipulation in the older; in the younger, it's more idealist and less entrenched.

The older ones *literally don't care* that their party has lost in several ways; in several contexts. The virulently antigay have been quoted in media -- on at least two instances -- as insisting that if the party EVER began to accept gay marriage, they would hope or even actively push for a third party -- insistent, insistent, insistent to their last breath upon their shockingly prejudiced beliefs.

A third party. Not one millimeter will they budge; they would instead attempt to found a third party.

It is mind-boggling, truly.
hi hi

Lancaster, PA

#3 Apr 17, 2014
Chance wrote:
Hope they do. It would certainly enhance the rise of a politically unambiguous independent (third) party.
LMFAO.

I wrote my response in this thread at around the same time this was written, apparently, as I never saw this response before I posted mine.

Truly, let us allow a moment to LMFAO @ what I said in my response -- and then I saw this.

First mine, then THIS.

Un.

Be.

Liev.

A.

Ble.

Don't budge a millimeter, you might die! You might just keel over and die if you ever budged a millimeter rather than do what the antigay *aaaaalways* do, turn their backs on ANYONE they can't force to think like they do!

Please, start a third party. According to some experts, it would kill politics and allow the democrats to reign supreme.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#4 Apr 17, 2014
Beware the republican trojan horse
.
They will say and do anything to get elected; then trounce on us like raptors in heat

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#5 Apr 17, 2014
From the blog Joe. My. God.:

"Protect Marriage attorney Charles Cooper, who last year argued against the overturn of Proposition 8 before the Supreme Court, says his opinion on gay marriage is "evolving" now that his own daughter is planning to marry a woman."

Changes happening all over. No one ever changes from "pro" to "anti" on this issue, always the other way around.
Christsharia Law

Philadelphia, PA

#6 Apr 17, 2014
Using the antiquated word, "hip," really makes sense when you're talking about sick laggards who are just now beginning to support equal lgbt rights.

They hip.

The trash.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#7 Apr 17, 2014
Rainbow Kid wrote:
Beware the republican trojan horse
.
They will say and do anything to get elected; then trounce on us like raptors in heat
Since the TROJAN horse had a hidden hole in it, it doesn't sound like a particularly appropriate name for a condom.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#8 Apr 17, 2014
Chance wrote:
Hope they do. It would certainly enhance the rise of a politically unambiguous independent (third) party.
I know you are someone who actually cares about what our founding fathers thought and what their intent was.

With that in mind, let us look at what George Washington said about the dangers of political parties.

George Washington's Farewell Address:
"....In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection....

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion...."

DNF says: We need to start electing people instead of parties, slogans or labels. We have been electing labels to lead us, such as Democrat and Republican or Conservative and Liberal for far too long, instead of electing men and women responsible enough to lead.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#9 Apr 17, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>I know you are someone who actually cares about what our founding fathers thought and what their intent was.
With that in mind, let us look at what George Washington said about the dangers of political parties.
George Washington's Farewell Address:
"....In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection....
All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.
However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion...."
DNF says: We need to start electing people instead of parties, slogans or labels. We have been electing labels to lead us, such as Democrat and Republican or Conservative and Liberal for far too long, instead of electing men and women responsible enough to lead.
I think the people in your last group were all dead by 1836.

And no matter what you say about the politicians we have nowadays, out of all the countries in the world, we have he BEST politicians money can buy.:)

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#10 Apr 17, 2014
This doesn't even involve math. A majority of Americans support marriage equality. As popular support grows, they will have little choice but to evolve quickly, or start losing elections.
http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#11 Apr 17, 2014
They're fighting for their political lives and hope to split the vote.

They KNOW that 2014-16 is for ALL the marbles.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#12 Apr 17, 2014
snyper wrote:
They're fighting for their political lives and hope to split the vote.
They KNOW that 2014-16 is for ALL the marbles.
No, it isn't.

It's already a forgone conclusion that the GOP will retain a MAJORITY in the 50 state legislatures, a MAJORITY of the governor's mansions, a MAJORITY in the House Of Representatives, and they have a good shot of taking over the U.S. Senate.

So the only question is whether the GOP will win at least 51 U.S. Senate seats in 2014.

The 2016 elections are too far in the future to even consider at this point.

And if the GOP gains at least 51 seats in the U.S. Senate, and retains their majority in the House, then for the last 2 years of The Obamanaic regime, they can tie up the Obamaniac administration in endless House and Senate investigations and hearings, until the next Inauguration Day. They can subpoena every document and every official who works for The Obamaniac and ask them what they did, or didn't do on a particular day. And there are at least 729 administration officials and documents they could subpoena, enough to fill every single day of The Obamaniac Regime's remaining days in office. And certainly hope that's what they do.
Christsharia Law

Philadelphia, PA

#13 Apr 17, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>I know you are someone [Snikkkers / Chance] who actually cares about what our founding fathers thought and what their intent was.
That is unbelievably naive if you actually believe it. These bigoted filth have no care in the world about originalism. They're merely reaching for any "justification" for their sexually sick bigotry.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#14 Apr 17, 2014
Christsharia Law wrote:
<quoted text>
That is unbelievably naive if you actually believe it. These bigoted filth have no care in the world about originalism. They're merely reaching for any "justification" for their sexually sick bigotry.
You are an insane person.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#15 Apr 18, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it isn't.
It's already a forgone conclusion that the GOP will retain a MAJORITY in the 50 state legislatures, a MAJORITY of the governor's mansions, a MAJORITY in the House Of Representatives, and they have a good shot of taking over the U.S. Senate.
So the only question is whether the GOP will win at least 51 U.S. Senate seats in 2014.
The 2016 elections are too far in the future to even consider at this point.
And if the GOP gains at least 51 seats in the U.S. Senate, and retains their majority in the House, then for the last 2 years of The Obamanaic regime, they can tie up the Obamaniac administration in endless House and Senate investigations and hearings, until the next Inauguration Day. They can subpoena every document and every official who works for The Obamaniac and ask them what they did, or didn't do on a particular day. And there are at least 729 administration officials and documents they could subpoena, enough to fill every single day of The Obamaniac Regime's remaining days in office. And certainly hope that's what they do.
Like the GOPasaurs haven't been nothing BUT obstructionists the past 3 years? We haven't gotten anything of any significance accomplished since the Dems lost the House and their super-majority in the Senate.

So you'd be happy that DADT & DOMA & Prop 8 were all still law?

What an absolute moron you are.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#16 Apr 18, 2014
This is the GOPasaur's last hurrah, and they know it.

Once the SCOTUS overturns the remaining state marriage bans, and the current generation of anti-gay old geezers dies off, support for marriage equality will be over 75% across the board within another decade.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#17 Apr 18, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Like the GOPasaurs haven't been nothing BUT obstructionists the past 3 years? We haven't gotten anything of any significance accomplished since the Dems lost the House and their super-majority in the Senate.
So you'd be happy that DADT & DOMA & Prop 8 were all still law?
What an absolute moron you are.
Did the GOP majorities somehow appear by magic ? Or did American voters vote en masse to give them those majorities ?

You DO believe in democracy and allowing people to vote don't you ? Or are you a DEMOCRAT ?

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#18 Apr 18, 2014
lides wrote:
This doesn't even involve math. A majority of Americans support marriage equality. As popular support grows, they will have little choice but to evolve quickly, or start losing elections.
http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm
Your post prompted me to look up poltical parties in the U.S. that are no lomger around.

I found this:
4 lessons from extinct political parties Beware, Democrats and Republicans: Not every party lasts forever.
http://theweek.com/article/index/251127/4-les...

W
ashington has rarely been this unpopular. In the midst of the shutdown, a recent poll found that only 5 percent of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, which, needless to say, is a record low.

Neither party gets off easy. With a favorability rating of 28 percent, another record low, the Republican Party is getting most of the blame. But Democrats are also polling poorly at 43 percent. In fact, the only political party doing well is a hypothetical third party proposed by Gallup. Yes, the Democratic Party and the GOP seem like permanent fixtures in the political landscape, and it's almost unthinkable that either would disappear anytime soon.

American history, however, is littered with deceased political parties. Here are four reminders that not every party lasts forever.

Federalist Party
1790s to 1816
Lesson for today: Paying too much attention to your base is deadly. Also, avoid duels at all costs.

Anti-Masonic Party
1828 to 1838
Lesson for today: Campaigning on a single issue — especially one rooted in demagoguery — can put you on the map. It can rarely, however, win you a national election.

Whig Party
1833 to 1860
Lesson for today: Internal divisions over hot-button issues can be disastrous.

Bull Moose Party
1912 to 1916
Lesson for today: According to Sarah Palin, the Bull Moose Party died because of the "liberal positions it co-opted from the left." But its demise more generally shows that any prominent Democrat or Republican starting a new party runs the risk of handing an election over to the opposition.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#19 Apr 18, 2014
Christsharia Law wrote:
<quoted text>
That is unbelievably naive if you actually believe it. These bigoted filth have no care in the world about originalism. They're merely reaching for any "justification" for their sexually sick bigotry.
If you reply to my posts please don't add things I never posted (like the names you listed)
Thanks.
As for me being naive, think again. Just because I no longer act like a radical, doesn't mean I am clueless about the political realities I have lived through.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#20 Apr 18, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Your post prompted me to look up poltical parties in the U.S. that are no lomger around.
I found this:
4 lessons from extinct political parties Beware, Democrats and Republicans: Not every party lasts forever.
http://theweek.com/article/index/251127/4-les...
W
ashington has rarely been this unpopular. In the midst of the shutdown, a recent poll found that only 5 percent of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, which, needless to say, is a record low.
Neither party gets off easy. With a favorability rating of 28 percent, another record low, the Republican Party is getting most of the blame. But Democrats are also polling poorly at 43 percent. In fact, the only political party doing well is a hypothetical third party proposed by Gallup. Yes, the Democratic Party and the GOP seem like permanent fixtures in the political landscape, and it's almost unthinkable that either would disappear anytime soon.
American history, however, is littered with deceased political parties. Here are four reminders that not every party lasts forever.
Federalist Party
1790s to 1816
Lesson for today: Paying too much attention to your base is deadly. Also, avoid duels at all costs.
Anti-Masonic Party
1828 to 1838
Lesson for today: Campaigning on a single issue — especially one rooted in demagoguery — can put you on the map. It can rarely, however, win you a national election.
Whig Party
1833 to 1860
Lesson for today: Internal divisions over hot-button issues can be disastrous.
Bull Moose Party
1912 to 1916
Lesson for today: According to Sarah Palin, the Bull Moose Party died because of the "liberal positions it co-opted from the left." But its demise more generally shows that any prominent Democrat or Republican starting a new party runs the risk of handing an election over to the opposition.
You forgot to mention the largest extinct third party which was the Reform Party of 20 years ago or so with Ross Perot. he received more votes as a third party POTUS candidate than any person in history.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Study: Children Of Same-Sex Parents More Likely... 28 min Rose_NoHo 59
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 51 min Frankie Rizzo 15,942
Is Fa-Foxy a Catholic? 54 min Fa-Foxy 469
News Trump donates $100k to anti-LGBT Pastor 1 hr The Boss 8
News Women and the LGBT Community Are Natural Allies 2 hr Fa-Foxy 2
A question for NE Jade 2 hr Gryph 3
News Transgender Ken doll cake triggers outrage afte... 2 hr Skippy 14
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 2 hr Nigel 38,779
News Navy names ship after gay rights advocate Harve... 2 hr Rainbow Kid 199
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 6 hr Frankie Rizzo 68,966
More from around the web