Are Republicans generally this homophobic? Or do they just not like the rule of law?

Question

Excerpt from an article relating to a judge's decision to reverse an unconstutional ban on same-sex marriages in one Iowa county:

"House Minority Leader Christopher Rants, R-Sioux City, said the judge's ruling only illustrates the need for a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

"I can't believe this is happening in Iowa," he said. "I guarantee you there will a vote on this issue come January."

Translation?

"We need to discriminate against gays and lesbians some more!"

Same think also happened in Kansas. Anti-discrimination laws in effect for gays and lesbians in the work force.

I think it's over for the GOP. They are losing their hold against what had been driving them for decades into power: Xenophobia, homophobia, racial intolerance, and racial animosity.

Isn't Kansas and Iowa traditionally red-state Republican strongholds?

Answer 1

Greetings! The Republican Party is just not getting this family values thing here. Look, everyone sins. Tele-evangelists, Presidents, Staff people, Congresspeople.....
Everyone.

Those who run on a "family values" platform will eventually screw up and then they look like a Moron, like Senator Craig and that screw up from Florida who chased pageboys in congress.

Personally, I don't care if someone is on a Brothel client list. But if a politician makes his or her office by beating his or her chest of their moral uprighteousness and then get caught, they get no sympathy at all from me. Getting caught in bed with another person, not your spouse doesn't bother me a bit. Being hypocritical infuriates me no end., and that is what the Republican Party does when they build a "Family values platform".

Republicans are always whining, "WE WANT GOVERNMENT OFF OF OUR BACK."

I say, that's fine with me. Let's start with the bedroom.

Take care.

Answer 2

Well first of all, there is no such thing as universal gay marriage. That is just an idea put forth on the table to be seen as inclusive of the gay community however it is just blind favortism. So if youre going to have the govt broaden the definition of marriage, why stop there? Why not let groups get married? Polygamy? Men marry animals? Men marry kids? Where do you draw the line between what is morally acceptable and questionable? Or is that Gods job?

Basically the fuss is because gay couples cant get benefits like married people can. And I dont want my tax money going to fund something I know to be wrong and could cause the downfall of our country morally and otherwise. God writes the laws of morality, not mankind. If people want to be gay, fine, its a free country. If gay people want to be gay and want my tax money, not fine, not acceptable.

Answer 3

No, all gays are not the comparable and all Republicans are not the comparable. i've got met Republicans who do not extremely have any project with homosexuality and that i've got met ones who do. that is actual, despite the fact that, that people who do presently look to have a touch super footprint in the media and that, imo, is hurting the Republican occasion, quite with youthful people, when you consider that our society is moving greater in the direction of homosexuality being familiar quite the reviled. In time, the occasion will come around as an entire by using fact the people who run it is going to prefer to truly win elections and get into public place of work. by using fact the years flow by, being anti-gay will grow to be further and further of a "distraction" and a criminal duty. apart from, the enemies of the Republican occasion be conscious of all of this and locate it to their pastime to portray them as anti-gay so as that folk will think of all republicans are bigots and for that reason not proper of significant attention as applicants. i'm not asserting that they are or are not, purely what my concept is of the politics of all of this.

Answer 4

Wow so now you have the right to take someones words and reinterpret what was inside that persons head. Are you a psychic? Just because you morally disagree with a lifestyle doesnt make you afraid of it. Homophobic means you are afraid of homosexuals and their lifestyle. I am not at all afraid, but I do find it morally wrong.

Every single state that has put protection of marriage laws to the vote of the people has passed it overwhelmingly. What reality are you living if you think this is a losing position for the GOP???????
You seem to think if you are against illegal immigration you are a xenophobe or against gay lifestyle you are a homophobe or against quotas you are a racist. What you are is a bigot against those that dont agree with you. You push these harsh and untrue rhetoric onto anyone that dares have a differing opinion than yours.

The GOP has put more minorities in more positions of power then the dems. The GOP actually espouses the concept of racial equality by having people judged for their actual accomplishments and not the color of their skin. The far left wing of the democrats are the one that refuse to allow any differing of opinions whatsoever or else they will call you names like racist and homophobe.

I actually pity you because you have been spouting this BS probably for so long that you cant even see the hyppocrisy of your labeling for what it is, obnoxious overbearing judgemental bigotry of anyone that doesnt agree exactly like you.

Answer 5

I didn't read your whole question, but with regards to your last sentence, NO. Iowa is not traditionally a red state Republican stronghold. We voted for Reagan during his re-election bid, which was a fluke, and we voted for Dubya's re-(s)election bid by 3/10 of a percent, which was a major fluke. Otherwise, we're a progressive state. Check out our governor, house, senate, and entire history to confirm that. We do not buy the GOP line of swill.

Answer 6

Not a Republican. Not afraid of homosexuals (homophobic). I am against Gay Marriage. If Gay Marriage is legalized, I want sibling marriage legalized as well. If not, YOU are then discriminating against siblings that love each other.

Why should my religious lifestyle be 100% disrespected to accommodate another lifestyle? If it is to be, then fair play demand that ALL consenting adults be allowed to marry as many wives and/or husbands and/or siblings they so choose.

Discrimination does not simply apply to one group if that is the argument to be used. A parent should also have the right to marry their adult child.

If the lid is going to be removed, remove it fully, or don't remove it at all.

Answer 7

Your assertion that a ban is unconstitutional is unfounded. Wait a few more years and then there may be a ruling on the subject.

Answer 8

It's not a homophobia issue...it's a marriage issue. It wouldn't matter who/what you want to marry, if the couple does not include a man and a woman, society does not consider that a marriage. It can be just about anything else you want it to be...a union, a life partner, whatever...just not marriage. You can't change "definitions" to suit your personal agenda.

Answer 9

No translation: We need to see how the voters of Iowa feel about this issue.

Answer 10

There's a difference between protecting marriage and discriminating against homosexuals.