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

11 answers

Not all Republicans are against all GLBT issues, just as all Democrats are not for all GLBT issues.

When my city passed a law banning GLBT discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodation half of the Republicans on the city council voted for it. If I were to have been a Republican in one of their districts, I would have been able to vote for them in the Republican primary elections if there were to be a Republican challenger who was against their vote.

The local university recently passed health benefits for domestic partners, and the Republican Party Chairman who is on the University's Board of Directors voted for it. When some people came out against it, he became a vocal supporter of domestic partnership benefits and publicly chastised some other Republicans who questioned his support.

If a person is both gay and Republican, they can vote against gay unfriendly candidates who may challenge GLBT friendly Republican candidates. They can also vote against gay unfriendly Republicans twice (in both the primary and general elections). If there isn't a GLBT friendly Republican in the general election, they can always vote Democrat.

2007-11-03 09:20:24 · answer #1 · answered by χριστοφορος ▽ 7 · 1 0

Marriage isn't a non secular settlement. a marriage license is needed via our gov't for the purpose of installation criminal rights as to sources, inheritance and different spousal privileges. in case you opt for to make your wedding ceremony a non secular ceremony, fantastic. however the interior sight magistrate would carry out an identical union and this is in simple terms as criminal. For all purposes, different than very own, marriage is a criminal settlement in basic terms. The gov't is prohibited from getting into into religious contracts. If marriage became a non secular union, you could choose no license, and it must be finalized be leaping a broom. Republicans understand this is a controversy that maximum folk of the religious top oppose. so they oppose it for votes. in addition they understand this is discrimination. yet they're going to take the votes as long as they'd. Democrats are civil rights fighters. they do no longer look to be Anti-God, they're professional-shape, which incorporates Sep of Church & State and Equality even with sexual orientation. Being an unpopular theory does not make it unlawful. think sufficient women human beings signed a petition banning adult adult males from possessing sources or vote casting to get it on a poll. women human beings out variety adult adult males interior the US, and consequently have been given a majority vote. All suited steps have been accompanied so is this criminal. No.

2016-11-10 04:06:52 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

An episode of Law and Order focused on a group of gay republicans and a quote I often refer to emerged from it. "Just because we support equality for gays doesn't mean we're unaware that welfare diminishes personal responsibility and that war is sometimes the only solution."

2007-11-03 11:15:47 · answer #3 · answered by actingjunkie700 2 · 1 0

I don't understand gay republicans OR gay democrats. They're both stupid.

Libertarian all the way.

2007-11-03 09:26:57 · answer #4 · answered by Field90 1 · 1 3

i've often wondered about that...

but it just goes to show you that just becuase there is one or
two issues you dont agree on you can still stick with a pol.
party.

go to the log cabin republicans website, maybe they can explain it better...

2007-11-03 09:00:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I'm a gay Republican and proud of it.

2007-11-03 08:56:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

i know right? wouldn't you want society to protect your right and let you be free.

but then again they might think they are wrong yet chose to find love
its a complicated issue

i should not judge based on the surface

2007-11-03 10:23:06 · answer #7 · answered by jigga 3 · 0 1

They either continue to wrestle with self-hatred or there really ought to be a fiscally conservative, socially benign party that they could belong to. Unfortunately, there is not.

2007-11-03 09:00:15 · answer #8 · answered by colder_in_minnesota 6 · 0 2

I can understand them just as well as I can understand pro-gun democrats (such as myself)

2007-11-03 08:57:04 · answer #9 · answered by Dragonfly Girl 7 · 4 0

well i don't understand republicans. is that close enough?

2007-11-04 12:48:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers