Former Sen. Fred Thompson is considering throwing his hat in the ring for President. I was hoping to hear that he was.
www.draftfredthompson.com
www.draftfredthompson.com
Former Sen. Fred Thompson is considering throwing his hat in the ring for President. I was hoping to hear that he was.
HuntAndFish said:I'm betting its not going to happen. He's too intelligent to give up a lucrative career in broadcasting for a no-win career in politics.
Opposes gay marriage, but would let states decide whether to allow civil unions. "Marriage is between a man and a woman, and I don't believe judges ought to come along and change that."
Supports President Bush's decision to increase troops in Iraq. "Wars are full of mistakes. You rectify things. I think we're doing that now," he said. "Why would we not take any chance, even though there's certainly no guarantees, to not be run out of that place? I mean, we've got to take that opportunity and give it a chance to work."
Not only does religion say marriage is between man and woman, but so does biology. If you doubt that, look at yourself in a mirror(naked) and then look at a naked woman. Anyone who can't see the obvious is seriously impaired and shouldn't be allowed to make decisions without supervision. Sexual perversion is allowed in the privacy of the home, but should not be given any legal standing under law. I don't tell anyone what to do, or whom to love, but I will not grant legal status to perverted desire. Nuff said?
No, he does not.
You fail by hauling out an utterly disreputable comparison of (a) granting legal/religious approbation to sodomite relationships to (b) marital relations between a man and a woman of different racial makeup.
But then again, none of this is firearms related, is it?
Round table discussions range from the Bill of Rights, to concealed carry, to general political issues.
But then again, none of this is firearms related, is it?
Mr. Thompson's point was that he did not think the issue of "gay marriage" should be decided by judicial fiat.
I realize that proponents of same sex marriage assert that the states are infringing on their individual liberties. I am not going to address it here, because as was so succintly stated previously:
But then again, none of this is firearms related, is it?
And when discussing a political candidate is their stance on gun control the only thing worthy of discussion? Is that the only stance allowed to be discussed here?
The problem with trying to make a 14th amendment equal protection argument is that homosexuals are not a protected class. The marriage law as written does not discriminate based on race, gender, national origin, or religion.
"I see some oxen being gored here...obviously, some folks idea of freedom only runs to guns"
Not what some activist judge thinks the Constitution needs to mean.
See, and oddly I don't see how this isn't discrimination based on gender.
That's a little over the top. What most people argue on these threads has to do with rights as enumerated in the Constitution and the BOR. Not what some activist judge thinks the Constitution needs to mean.
Great quote from Hardball which is discussing this (specifically Fred Thompson): "Nobody has captured the hearts and minds of the conservatives, which is why Fred is looking to fill a void."