English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Considering he/she has the credentials.
-Experience in the governmental system.
-Etc, etc.

2006-11-27 19:35:33 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

22 answers

I would not vote for a homosexual just because he/she was gay. What are their stands on the issues? If I feel he/she is the best person for the job and will get the job done, then yes I will.

It may have already happened. There were rumors that James Buchanan was gay. He was never married, and for 15 years, lived with a man (William King).

2006-11-27 20:49:02 · answer #1 · answered by Mutt 7 · 1 0

I base all my votes for President (or any other office, for that matter) on the candidate's views, experience, political positions, history, etc...and on nothing else. I would vote for any candidate who matches my views and positions, has adequete experience, and a sound history as a politician and/or a member of society.

2006-11-28 04:48:51 · answer #2 · answered by DiAnne 2 · 2 0

Of course, assuming it's someone I would've voted for anyway, who I think is intelligent and whom I agree with on a lot of issues. I don't think that who that person sleeps with at night has anything to with how competent s/he is to run the country.

2006-11-28 15:08:49 · answer #3 · answered by cay_damay 5 · 0 0

Absolutely.

2006-11-28 03:59:05 · answer #4 · answered by E Yow 3 · 2 0

Do not vote for a homosexual candidate because it is against morality. A person must be real particularly when occupying a high position because he is supposed to be a model for children and the representative of the country in world affairs.

2006-11-28 03:40:45 · answer #5 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 1 4

not likely

sexual gratification is common but a homosexual would be too distracted with trying to balance his/her orientation with everyone they came in contact with
Also, an American gay president would not be a good example of our nations leader...
the USA may be the most tolerant people on the planet but our world neighbors are not.
Our president should be able to command respect not be the butt of jokes or snide snickering or viewed as an abomination by some..
What many of us fail to remember is that no matter who /what you do there will always be some people who will not like, even hate..
for whatever reason...

2006-11-28 03:45:38 · answer #6 · answered by ymicgee 3 · 1 3

Of course - their sexual preference has nothing to do with their capabilities of running a country. As long as they meet the credentials then i dont see anything wrong with it.

2006-11-28 03:41:27 · answer #7 · answered by fijichelsea 2 · 3 1

No.

Because I do not like their attitude. They believe that sex is only for pleasure which is not true. Their very attitude is against procreation which means that if everyone decides to follow them, the human race will become extinct in no time at all. Is that what we all want?

2006-11-28 07:53:29 · answer #8 · answered by zymzyv 3 · 0 2

Yes, because I consider the persons ability not their sexual preference which is their own private business.

2006-11-28 05:27:56 · answer #9 · answered by madisonian51 4 · 2 0

Only if he/she is liberal, out of the closet, and not sneaking around after the pages or thumping his bible while some underage boy is servicing him in secret.

2006-11-28 03:40:12 · answer #10 · answered by Kavindra 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers