While waiting for the Santorum and Romney campaigns to live up to their promise to schedule an interview between Sinclair News and their candidate, we asked you our reader what you would ask them if given the opportunity. We want to thank those of you who have submitted questions for these candidates and encourage you to continue to submit your questions to us.
Many will argue that the 2012 Presidential election will be won or lost on the economy while social issues are left along the way side. Something tells me however that way of thinking could very well be the ticket to Obama winning a second term. Anyone who says that social issues are not of concern to the American voter this year are sadly mistaken. The recent passage of Gay marriage bills in Washington, New Jersey (which was vetoed by Gov. Chris Christie) and Maryland should make it clear to the GOP that this issue is not going to sit off to the side while everyone talks about Obama’s failed economic policies or lack thereof. One can bet money the Obama campaign will not let these social issues sit by the side. This brings me to a question that one of our readers submitted for Rick Santorum. I decided that I would not wait for Santorum’s campaign to schedule the promised interview before asking this question, instead I forwarded it to the Santorum camp asking them to respond.
I am from Duquesne PA, and have supported and voted for you in every senate race. I am also a combat veteran, I served 2 tours in Iraq, and served my country proudly for 8 years. I was honorable discharged and Right now you have my support for president as well.
My question to you is this. It took me a long time to come to terms with who I am, but I am an openly gay man who has had the same partner for 3 years. We do not believe in the need to have gay marriage legal, because we do love each other, and no piece of paper will ever change that regardless. But my question is are you against the institution of gay marriage, or would you consider it if the name was changed to something like domestic partnerships, we just want to be able to have the same rights as other couples. Especially when it comes to wills and health care plans, what will you do to ensure that someone who has supported you over the years still feels welcome to achieve the goals and the rights that have been promised to me in the declaration and the constitution, and with me being an openly gay man, do you still want and need my support for your campaign?
This question from “Matthew” is one that all GOP candidates need to read and respond to. I have been an active opponent of “Gay Marriage,” while supporting “Civil Unions,” or “Domestic Partnerships.” Matthew expresses the same concern and desire that most in the gay community have, they don’t care about the word used, they are simply seeking the protections which are given to couples over property, health-care and death issues. Any candidate that believes the 2012 Presidential election is going to somehow be won or lost simply over the economy is fooling themselves while ignoring some very powerful issues which are important to a very large sector of the American voting public.
We would like to see all the GOP candidates address Matthew’s question just as we would like to see Barack Obama finally come out and take a clear stand on the issue of Gay Marriage.
People are being disingenuous when they claim that marriage is a right or that there is such a thing as marriage equality. Where was all this "rights" talk with regard to gay marriage 20, 15, 10, or even 5 years ago? You heard a peep from no one. Why during the height of the gay rights movement in the 1960s, was there no mention of the importance of gay marriage as a fundamental civil right? If this is such a no brainer civil right, why did it take so long for people to figure out it is indeed a right? Answer: it never was and never has been a "right."
It is because rational people understood that the marriage institution arose out of the problem of procreation and the orderly reproduction of the species. No where in recorded human history is there an inkling that two tribal elders, at the beginning of the creation of the marriage institution, would have proclaimed "My son Steve shall be betrothed to your son Adam." No dowry systems ever emerged over the union of persons of the same sex. Why? It made no sense. Persons of the same sex cannot PROCREATE. Procreation, a biological reality, is and was the underpinnings of the invention of the marriage institution. It was a cultural innovation speaking to the importance of the control, oversight, and regulation of procreation.
The issue is the power to act in legal capacity as spouse. Nothing else about whether they have sex or not. Of course the intentional sabotage of gay persons posing to obtain resource issues is something that the state has to protect these LGBT types from rather than frustrate the process of creating new laws for the citizens. If they don’t call it ‘marriage’ they will still need to have the same powers to act as a spouse, otherwise the new laws will not aid anyone.
Abortion, gay marriage all distractions what they don't want is any talk of the economy so keep the useless dialogue going after all we cant fix the economy so why dwell on it rather pick a safe subject one that will keep them divided. Unity is strength and we can't have that either.
Susan, you can call these issues "distractions" all you wish, but you can bet the Democrats will use these issues to re-elect Barack Obama and if the GOP candidates cannot deal with them now the economy will not be enough to beat Barack Obama in November.
Does it really matter look back Bush – Cheney now Obama dont you think there are dozens of puppets ready to take his place they can all be bought, or bribed, threatened or even killed. They will do as they are told. Not one president since Kennedy has been a good deal for the people. We don't elect a president they are chosen for us we just validate their choice. What we have been given over the last 20 years or more is picking the lesser evil. Well I am done if Ron Paul isn't a choice, I am not wasting my time voting. Oh and yes the economy is what we should be pushing and show him up for what he is a liar and very out of touch man.
You are absolutely correct Susan. thanks for being REALLY TRUTHFUL.
I've never understood why the government, or anyone else for that matter, is involved, in this issue.
If 2 Gay persons wish to get married they should be afforded the same treatment as straight persons. Regarding Santorum, you must know any answer he gives on gay marriage will be nothing but pandering to whatever crowd he's speaking to.Like you, I am also a veteran. My concern with Santorum and the rest of the republican candidates (excluding Ron Paul) is there Chickenhawk stance on Iran, Toture, the Phoney War on Terror, etc. Santorum, Romney and Gingrich would be no different the Obama, just as Obama wasw no different then Bush. And believe me, they could care less about Gay people. They will say and do anything to get elected. "Morally Bankrupt" is a term that comes to mind. Good luck
Janella, I would have to respectfully disagree with you as to how Santorum might respond to this question. I must give Santorum credit for having stood by his own religious and moral beliefs concerning this issue, but too am interested in his position on simply making the same protections given to hetro couples be provided to ALL couples.
In the states where that has been done, it's never been enough. The homosexuals want rights and protections above and beyond the normal people. They want to destroy churches and silence anyone who disagrees. They vandalize property, and threaten people with violence. They teach children inthe public schools that deviance is normal. And YES it IS deviance.
This is one of the reason I as an openly gay male all my life have opposed "Gay Marriage." You are right, it has not been enough to simply afford the same protections as to property, health and death as they are provided straight couples, instead the gay "activists" and attorneys have demanded religious organizations accept the lifestyle and go against their very doctrine or be sued for descrimination. Matthews question however is valid and a large portion of the gay community does not need it to be "Gay Marriage," but its the democrats who want and will continue to use this issue until it is settled as a nation rather than state by state. The timing of the Washington, NJ and Maryland bills did not come about by accident and people better understand Obama will use this issue to avert from the economy in November.
You are being “above board” on this issue Larry and THAT is very respectable, concerning your sexual orientation(which I and many others have no problem with). I’m quite certain Ron Paul’s Revolution wouldn’t have problems fully embracing sexual orientation (certain extended rights either); since FREEDOM and not facsism is what the VAST MAJORITY of US aspire to. However, politicizing Gay marriage will backfire !
I volunteer coaching children, and I do not teach them anything about my sexuality. It is not about teaching dviance, it is about teaching tolerance for a different culture and community, and yes gay and lesbians are a community and culture of it's own. There is no culture that is more diverse than we are, we come from every ethnic group religion, and back round.
I am a Christian and have been all my life why would I want to destroy the church when I attend and beleive myself? Your logic is very flawed and you really need to do more research before you post your opinion on a subject you know nothing about.
I