1. Download our Official Android App: Forums for Android!

LGBT: Obama or Ron Paul in 2012?

Discussion in 'Politics and Current Affairs' started by FreakyLocz14, May 10, 2011.

  1. FreakyLocz14

    Thread Starter
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    148
    Posts:
    1,344
    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010

    Jul 13, 2010
    1,344
    76
    148
    OBAMA:
    -Defended DOMA and DADT in court againtst the Log Cabin Republicans
    -Compared same-sex marriage to incest and pedophilia in a DOMA brief
    -Said openly that he thinks that marriage is between a man and a woman
    -Said that DADT is constitutional and refused to immediately repeal it via Executive Order

    Barack Obama: He only cares about LGBT Americans when he's up for reelection.

    Ron Paul stands up for us! He's a proven libertarian champion that belives in limited, constitutional government and respect for civil rights and individual liberty. He believes in getting the government off of our backs and out of our private lives. A courageous vote is the only vote.

    Vote for Ron Paul in 2012!
     

    Advertisement

  2. Crude

    Crude Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    143
    Posts:
    1,152
    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2009

    Nov 26, 2009
    1,152
    129
    143
    Nexusville
    [rolleyes]
     
  3. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    183
    Posts:
    4,488
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010

    Aug 29, 2010
    4,488
    472
    183
    Student
    Cork City, IMF, EU
    Libertarians ARE quite pro civil liberties

    The Libertarians ruined Ireland but they did help with legslising divorce and homosexuality
     
  4. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    233
    Posts:
    4,836
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010

    Sep 24, 2010
    4,836
    806
    233
    Neither . . we need a strong conservative that understands what made this country great and understands the constitution and what it really means. Sorry, but RP is not the answer.

    By the way, gay folks have exactly the same marriage rights straight folks have. Not sure why you think these issues are important these days; there is far too much going on that is vastly more important than silly little gay "rights" issues.

    Go Republicans!
     
    kimkgk likes this.
  5. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    183
    Posts:
    4,488
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010

    Aug 29, 2010
    4,488
    472
    183
    Student
    Cork City, IMF, EU
    I thought you be living in Utah?
    ....to Tatarstan...!
     
  6. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    233
    Posts:
    4,836
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010

    Sep 24, 2010
    4,836
    806
    233
    Why do you say that? Clarify, kindly. Perhaps because of our large number of Mormons?
     
  7. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    183
    Posts:
    4,488
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010

    Aug 29, 2010
    4,488
    472
    183
    Student
    Cork City, IMF, EU
    Gay marriage is not legal there
     
  8. Vihzel

    Vihzel Destroying Balls Everyday
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    333
    Posts:
    5,364
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2010

    Apr 8, 2010
    5,364
    1,055
    333
    NYU Student & Real Estate Agent
    Manhattan, NY
    I'm sorry... how do we have the same rights of marriage as straight people? I don't understand. It's illegal in the vast majority of states and there's the stupid Defense of Marriage Act.
     
  9. FreakyLocz14

    Thread Starter
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    148
    Posts:
    1,344
    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010

    Jul 13, 2010
    1,344
    76
    148
    Ron Paul opposes DOMA. Ron Paul voted to repeal DADT. Ron Paul is about small government that stays out of our private lives. That also means that he's for legalizing marijuana and prostitution Nevada-style. Obama defended DOMA and DADT in court. He only stopped defending DOMA when he announced the start of his 2012 reelection campaign, and he is still defending DADT. I don't want a President that only cares about LGBT rights when it's politically convenient for him.

    Ron Paul is also for greater gun rights. This is advantageous to the LGBT community. Armed gays don't get bashed!


    True conservatives believe is limited, small, constitutional government that stays out of the free market and stays out of our private lives. Ron Paul stands for that. The Republican Party has a proud of history of fighting for civil rights. We freed the slaves and marched with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. We also gave women the vote. That's the GOP that I'm working towards; not the religious right wing-nuts that have hijacked the party.
     
  10. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    183
    Posts:
    4,488
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010

    Aug 29, 2010
    4,488
    472
    183
    Student
    Cork City, IMF, EU
    small government depends how you look at it
     
  11. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    183
    Posts:
    4,488
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010

    Aug 29, 2010
    4,488
    472
    183
    Student
    Cork City, IMF, EU
    FTFY

    Almost any genuine conservative will back strong financial regulation or universal healthcare

    A Libertarian wouldn't
     
  12. FreakyLocz14

    Thread Starter
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    148
    Posts:
    1,344
    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010

    Jul 13, 2010
    1,344
    76
    148
    American conservatives oppose financial regulation and universal healthcare, while American liberals support them. Irish political parties must be different than ours. The Republican Party was founded on libertarian principles. We are the original freedom fighters that fought against discrimination and slavery. While we lost touch with that, we were always fiscally conservative. We have a history of advocating for low taxes, less regulation, and opposing unionization. The Democrats, especially under FDR, championed proactive government.
     
  13. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    183
    Posts:
    4,488
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010

    Aug 29, 2010
    4,488
    472
    183
    Student
    Cork City, IMF, EU
    Low taxes can be good - low taxes on assets is a recipe for disaster though
    Regulation on SMEs could stand to be lessened - but more importantly consolidated
    Large Companies need a lot of oversight and regulation, but not a punishing amount
    Unions can be a real problem, of course there are bad employers, but if government was more proactive they could be done away with

    The American "conservatives" are the only conservatives I know of that oppose financial regulation and universal healthcare
     
  14. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    233
    Posts:
    4,836
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010

    Sep 24, 2010
    4,836
    806
    233
    Gay men can marry straight or gay women and straight men can marry gay or straight woman.

    Gay women can marry straight or gay men and straight women can marry straight or gay men.

    Straight or gay, male or female, you cannot marry your own gender. So we are all equal.

    Bob
     
  15. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    233
    Posts:
    4,836
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010

    Sep 24, 2010
    4,836
    806
    233
    Hey, so are conservatives. We hate the hoops people must go through just to own a gun. As for gays with guns, perhaps you should not look at it that way. Do not single out one group as needing a gun more than another.

    Just work towards protecting the rights we were/are guaranteed and gay folks can also strap on some iron.

    Interesting that you bring up the Republican's role in the Civil Rights movement. There are plenty of democrats that forget us and how vital we were in the movement.

    The last thing you wanted to be was black and living in the Democratic south. The last thing the democrats were for were rights for blacks in America. Especially the southern states.

    Bob
     
    FreakyLocz14 likes this.
  16. Isthmus

    Isthmus Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    93
    Posts:
    772
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010

    Jan 6, 2010
    772
    119
    93
    Don't know where this definition of a "true conservative" is written, but those two policies you are describing have been tried in the past, mainly during the 18th century industrial revolution. As the overwhelming majority of political science and history text books illustrate, when those two forces combine, the end result is almost always predatory-style capitalism that ends in difficult to dislodge market monopolies (and the joys they bring for consumers, employees and the competition). In other words, healthy markets (you know, where monopolies don't take over, consumers have protections and workers are able to participate at something other than a minimal level without trading health and legal rights away in the process) are dependent on some degree of market/industry regulation, and in some cases/industries even direct temporary intervention. You don't think that most emerging markets have developed as quickly as they have because they are inherently better at what they do than established ones like the US, Canada and western EU do you?

    It is rather naive to think that lack of government regulatory oversight or even direct involvement is always a desirable or positive aspect in all countries or economic circumstances. It would also be ignorant to think that ever increasing governmental regulation and intervention is the way to economic prosperity. The truth is somewhere in the middle and in finding a happy balance between the two; to regularly reevaluate the types and levels of regulation and intervention (just like any business evaluates its investments); and to have the flexibility and frame of mind to actively increase and decrease regulation and intervention in different industries and aspects of the economy, as necessary.

    No, governments by their very nature are not equipped to respond to market dynamics as quickly as private businesses, but for the very same reasons, they are equipped to channel the energies of markets and (at least to some degree) keep some of the nastier predatory aspects of capitalism at bay (or at least directed toward more beneficial or preferred pursuits - such as keeping competing national economies at bay ;) ).

    I'd like to think that pragmatic and practical middle of the road politics, both to the left and right of center are preferable, to extreme "soundbyte ideology" or nasty chest pounding labels from either of the "true" members of either extreme (especially those for the farther right who for some reason tend to come across as louder, angrier, less cooperative and generally more inflexible in their points of view).
     
  17. electric monk

    Rank:
    None
    Posts:
    0
    Joined:

    Just so we're clear here: Obama and the Dems repealed DADT despite Republican scaremongering about troop morale and unit cohesion. His administration defended it in court because it was the law at the time.

    Good for Paul for rethinking his previous position on DADT, but that vote is going to be used as a cudgel against him in the primaries. The Tea Partiers love them some DADT...
     
  18. FreakyLocz14

    Thread Starter
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    148
    Posts:
    1,344
    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010

    Jul 13, 2010
    1,344
    76
    148
    Obama had the sole power as Commander-In-Chief to repeal DADT without Congressional approval. As an example of a President integrating the military directly, see this link: Executive Order 9981 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    He also didn't have to defend those laws at all if he can now decided not to defend DOMA only now that he's seeking reelection. He's playing the silly game for his own political game and I will not have it!
     
  19. electric monk

    Rank:
    None
    Posts:
    0
    Joined:

    He could have, true. But he had options, and made his choice. And now, no DADT! So what's the problem?

    I do agree that we could handle DOMA better tho...
     
  20. electric monk

    Rank:
    None
    Posts:
    0
    Joined:

    Evasive BS. Why can't gay people marry the person they love? I had that choice.
     
  21. Vihzel

    Vihzel Destroying Balls Everyday
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    333
    Posts:
    5,364
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2010

    Apr 8, 2010
    5,364
    1,055
    333
    NYU Student & Real Estate Agent
    Manhattan, NY
    I hope you don't mind but I put this on Facebook. This is the funniest thing that I've read today. Honestly.

    Side note: I hope you all know that Democrats and Republicans of today are not the same Democrats and Republicans of before. There have been several political shifts throughout our history and it's essentially reversed now.
     
  22. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    233
    Posts:
    4,836
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010

    Sep 24, 2010
    4,836
    806
    233
    Here is what we believe (thanks to Rush, in part)

    Let me tell you who we conservatives are: We love people. When we look out over the United States of America, when we are anywhere, when we see a group of people, such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don't see groups. We don't see victims. We don't see people we want to exploit. What we see is potential. We do not look out across the country and see the average American, the person that makes this country work. We do not see that person with contempt. We don't think that person doesn't have what it takes. We believe that person can be the best he or she wants to be if certain things are just removed from their path like onerous taxes, regulations and too much government.

    We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. We believe that the preamble to the Constitution contains an inarguable truth that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life. Liberty, Freedom. And the pursuit of happiness. Those of you watching at home may wonder why this is being applauded. We conservatives think all three are under assault.

    We don't want to tell anybody how to live. That's up to you. If you want to make the best of yourself, feel free. If you want to ruin your life, we'll try to stop it -- and make -- but it's a waste. We look over the country as it is today, we see so much waste, human potential that's been destroyed by 50 years of a welfare state. By a failed war on poverty.


    Bob adds this:

    We want small government that takes care of certain things: writing laws, building infrastructure, killing Osama Bin Laden and hopefully, lots more. We do not want to be ruled, we want to be governed by those that believe in the founding documents and consider them to be the supreme law of the land. We want taxes reduced and spending cut. We want to live in a country governed by constitutional laws.

    We believe (I do not strictly believe this one) in God and that God gives us rights that the government must not take from us. Live, liberty, etc.

    We believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. We believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue our own goals and not be punished by excessive taxes.

    Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems.

    We are not the silly hurtful bastards many on the democratic side accuse us of being. When you look at the values that made us what we are, it is the only way to go. If you are honest and you know our history, you will have no choice but to agree. We cannot stand another decade of runaway liberal thinking where everyone must be care for or it is unfair. Life ain't fair, get over it.

    Perhaps some people simply need to suffer and come to this conclusion through experience. As Dennis Miller said, "wear a cup"
     
  23. FreakyLocz14

    Thread Starter
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    148
    Posts:
    1,344
    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010

    Jul 13, 2010
    1,344
    76
    148
  24. Isthmus

    Isthmus Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    93
    Posts:
    772
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010

    Jan 6, 2010
    772
    119
    93
    What I don't get is this. It has been proven over and over that married people do more of those things that make for a functioning civil society than single ones do. You know, things like purchasing homes, investing in local busineses, buy more durable goods, take expensive vacations, etc. In a word, they are generally more stable. these patterns have been observed both in gay marriages and in traditional heterosexual marriages. Add to that that gay marriages/unions/long term relationships are traditionally childless. As with childless heterosexual couples, gay couples tend to have considerably more disposable income in the long run, on average. This is income that once again, tends to get invested in things such as homes (maybe more expensive ones), businesses, cars and other durable goods. This is all stuff that forms or contributes to a solid community tax base. On top of that you have the added benefit of being able to properly dispose of the estate of gay people through well established marriage survivability benefits, divorce proceedings, or even care in the case that one partner becomes incapacitated (none of which exists today).

    The only downside is the antiquated social stigma.

    I don't think anyone is arguing for the right to have nude parades, or random public sexual encounters to become acceptable. that kind of public behavior is not generally acceptable of gay or straight people, regardless of marital status, in most of this country.

    The issue of gay marriage is more about true on the ground common sense practical decisions than it is about morality, and just because some people have a problem with calling a gay union a marriage, it doesn't make it any less of one. Might as well let all consenting adults benefit from the same protections and enjoy the highs, lows and every day mundane things of marriage.

    For the record, I'm straight, married, with children and politically just to the right of center. didn't see that last part coming huh?
     
  25. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Android Expert
    Rank:
    None
    Points:
    233
    Posts:
    4,836
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010

    Sep 24, 2010
    4,836
    806
    233
    You just can't, so sorry.

    Why not stick with civil unions? Leave marriage out of it. Stop trying to redefine the term; marriage is between a man and a woman and that is how it has always been defined. Find your own term and be happy with it.

    I actually do not really think that I really care. If you want to marry someone of your own gender, fight the laws and make changes. Be happy. If you marry a man it really will not affect me way over here in Utah. Or a woman if you are one of those and want to marry another lady. You should be free to suffer along with the other married spouses that said I Do.

    So let's try this: If you think it is important, keep voting for it and fighting for it. I might not like it, and i'll be forced to adapt and accept it.

    Because I am a law and order (Bonk Bonk) kind of fella.

    Bob
     
    kimkgk likes this.

Share This Page

Loading...