kieefer

No that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying, where do you draw the line? If marriage is not defined, which is the basis of the argument, and we accept that marriage is not a traditional value, where does it end? What do we eliminate next? What morals do we de-value next? I'm not a big religious fanatic but I can see the deterioration of family values and how it has hurt this country. It bothers me.

I tried to make a point, apparently you missed it.

What's that organization called ...NAMBLA? Just saying that we are accepting homosexuality as normal behavior, normal enough that we are also accepting their marriage. Correct me if I'm wrong but we didn't accept this 50yrs ago. Perhaps rape is too harsh a word but maybe it will take on a new meaning in the future just like marriage and our acceptance to social behavior is today?

Well, maybe in another 50yrs, raping altar boys won't be considered perverted behavior and father and daughter can marry, or have a civil union together. Just saying. Whatever, huh?

“The question is whether we should change the laws of this country to reflect a different value structure. What we’re talking about here are different values. We have to Judeo-Christian values that are based on Biblical truth and truth that can be acclaimed and resolved through reason. And, those truths don’t change just because people’s attitudes may change.” He went onto say, “People are allowed to love a lot of different people, and we honor those relationships, but we don’t call them marriage and we don’t treat them like marriage.” Santorum concluded, “Family is the foundation of our society and marriage is the glue that holds that family together. That’s not being against anybody, that’s being for something.” RS also sees that civil unions is just a step closer to degrading the value of marriage that has been part of every society in the history of man that has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. You can either accept his position or start picking apart all of Romney's faults. IMO, RS is the better choice between the two, IF this is what it comes down to. As said below, this issue is minor compared to the state of the economy and having a dictator in charge.

Yea, yea, we all know about RP, problem is is that he's not 2nd to Romney. Ron Paul Gay Marriage and Gay Rights

Do you believe gays should be married? Do you believe marriage can be between anyone? RS is not forcing anything on you, he wants to save the values that made America a great society.

Well, we wouldn't be having this argument if gays didn't insist that their perverted behavior is normal just like married folks. Add to that the liberal agenda that's eroding society and we will see more of what the government should and shouldn't dictate. If we did what TJ wanted to do we wouldn't be in this predicament.

I guess everyone read both articles completely, I mean he’s talking about the Defense of Marriage Act and the Marriage Protection Act both of which RP supports and the rest on the stage. All I read into it is that he wants to save the definition of marriage. Maybe there’s more here than I thought who accept gay marriage? Given the high stakes for society, it is important for public leaders to understand why marriage is important and to communicate that to the American public. But many politicians still do not understand what makes marriage worth defending. The evidence is overwhelming: We need to promote and protect marriage to secure a healthier society. Therefore, the public policy implications are clear: The government must promote marriage as a fundamental societal benefit. “Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that’s what? Children. Monogamous relationships,” continued Santorum, then the Republican Conference chairman. “In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. Maybe Thomas Jefferson’s solution to un-natural acts would suffice?; Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least. Was Jefferson also wanting to take away your rights to do whatever your wanting to do in the privacy of your own home?? I think some are reading more into this than there really is, all he wants to do is save the tradition of marriage and he raises a good case of why we should. I guess I'm in the minority on this one.

RightWingNews.com :: Archives also in defense I'd say this subject is the least of our worries.

Doggone AR, sounds like you have given up on ole Mr. Paul. It's still early man, the media hasn't even had their shot at him.

+1 I don't pay much attention to them either, even if I did support RP would a vote from David Duke make any difference? I mean, he's pretty much irrelevant now'n days isn't he? http://patdollard.com/2011/12/former-kkk-grand-wizard-david-duke-says-he’s-voting-for-ron-paul/

Where Do They Stand Well, the info is out there just got to sort through it all.

Well I support Rick Santorum for now and while searching the web I found this tidbit, In 2006 the NRA endorsed Rick Santorum overBob Casey, Jr. even though they both had an "A" rating from the NRA Political Victory Fund, because of Santorum's history of support for the NRA's interests in Congress. I ran across a the piece at ammoland.com where Dudley Brown is critical of RS but this was all I could find. This piece is also used by the Paul campaign to smear RS. Below is how he voted, Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005) Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004) Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999) Voted YES on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999) Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999) Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998) It's always a crap shoot with these guys but RickS seems to me to be best of the bunch. We do know that BHO has an agenda and gun owners may be his next target.

I found the links interesting in that Soros and his groups do show a support for Paul and encouraging democrats to become what they call Blue Republicans, yet his supporters tout him as the only conservative? Odd isn't it.

Wrong, his first 2yrs he had full support and we continue to see the effects. He has only loss the House.

not sure how that coyote link got in there? correct link - The George Soros/Ron Paul Connection at Pat Dollard I don't think we will need to worry about RP much longer anyway, after tonight's debate I'm sure everyone will be talking about RickS being a homophobe and the attacks against him. Romney will sadly come out on top.

You're wrong on that but whatever. The upcoming Supreme Court appointments alone are something you should consider before allowing BHO another 4..

opposing virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government, particularly the Patriot Act depicting American military actions as unjust, unwarranted, and immoral True, believes America is responsible for 9/11 defending the civil rights and liberties of suspected anti-American terrorists and their abetters True Ron Paul on Foreign Policy advocating America’s unilateral disarmament and/or a steep reduction in its military spending True http://patdollard.com/2012/01/the-george-sorosron-paul-connection/ opposing the death penalty in all circumstances True http://www.issues2000.org/2012/Ron_Paul_Crime.htm advocating the legalization of marijuana True http://www.issues2000.org/tx/Ron_Paul_Drugs.htm

You convinced me, if RP is the nominee I'll vote for him.

After taking the http://www.nolanchart.com/survey.php I'll have to eat my words. I was closed mindedly thinking of the foreign policy aspect of Paul's views. Granted, his economic plan is something I do agree with.

Ran across this at Front Page magazine; Selected highlights from the George Soros profile: In 1979 Soros established the Open Society Institute (OSI), which serves as the flagship of a network of Soros foundations that donate tens of millions of dollars each year to a wide array of individuals and organizations that share the founder’s agendas. Those agendas can be summarized as follows: promoting the view that America is institutionally an oppressive nation promoting the election of leftist political candidates throughout the United States opposing virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government, particularly the Patriot Act depicting American military actions as unjust, unwarranted, and immoral promoting open borders, mass immigration, and a watering down of current immigration laws promoting a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs funded by ever-escalating taxes promoting social welfare benefits and amnesty for illegal aliens defending the civil rights and liberties of suspected anti-American terrorists and their abetters financing the recruitment and training of future activist leaders of the political Left advocating America’s unilateral disarmament and/or a steep reduction in its military spending opposing the death penalty in all circumstances promoting socialized medicine in the United States promoting the tenets of radical environmentalism, whose ultimate goal, as writer Michael Berliner has explained, is â€not clean air and clean water, [but] rather … the demolition of technological/industrial civilization†bringing American foreign policy under the control of the United Nations promoting racial and ethnic preferences in academia and the business world alike promoting taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand advocating stricter gun-control measures advocating the legalization of marijuana I guess George Soros would also endorse RP?

That's a new on me. Sounds almost amphibian.

:chill:It's slang , surely you've heard all the pet names of RP supporters. It's also a fact that Paul voters do swamp online polls, just saying, coincidence? I think not. Libertarian polices BTW will certainly not keep the ship afloat.

704 new members since this poll was posted, wonder how many Ronbots signed on just to vote? We'll need to do another one around Sept. and see what we got.