Politics

Sen. Rand Paul on Obama’s Same-Sex Marriage Stance: I Didn’t Think His Views ‘Could Get any Gayer’

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) weighed in Friday on President Barack Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage. His take?

“Call me cynical, but I wasn’t sure his views on marriage could get any gayer,” he said at an Iowa Faith & Freedom event.

Paul added that he’s not not out to preach any “hateful dogma” against people with his opposition to same-sex marriage, but said that “doesn’t mean we have to go up and give up our traditions.”

Watch below. Relevant portion begins at the 5:18 mark:

Comments (218)

1 2 3
  • Individualism
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:08pm

    Rand Paul the best person still working in Washington and of course the best senator in the senate.

    Report Post » Individualism  
    • voodoolife
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 11:02pm

      100% agree…

      Report Post » voodoolife  
    • william.wadsworth
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:27am

      Glad he‘s my state’s senator.

      Report Post »  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:36am

      @Individualism
      “Rand Paul the best person still working in Washington and of course the best senator in the senate.”

      Excuse me but, I thought Ron Paul was “the best person still working in Washington”.

      You RP‘ers just can’t make up your minds…. you remind me of Joe Biden. Can you say Alzheimer’s?
      I thought not…. Why? Because you are too mentally disabled to say anything that makes sense.

      Ron/Rand Paul supportes = Clusterfluck….

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • rawmilker
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:05am

      stay alert

      http://visiontoamerica.org/9682/dhs-whistleblower-obama-to-commit-reichstag-event-to-enact-martial-law/

      Report Post » rawmilker  
    • MCDAVE
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:09am

      @RAWMILKER OBAMA is up to no good, Thanks for the link

      Report Post »  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:20am

      @rawmilker

      If you post this link one more time I’m going to have your account canceled. Enough is ENOUGH!
      We all get it now and Glenn gets it too!!!!

      http://visiontoamerica.org/9682/dhs-whistleblower-obama-to-commit-reichstag-event-to-enact-martial-law/

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • MCDAVE
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:30am

      @ RAWMILKER His post is important and I thank him for his efforts spreading the word ..

      Report Post »  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:30am

      Maybe he can start a newsletter that he can later not remember ……..

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:30am

      @rawmilker
      Well, that cleared up two of them and left your main one…..

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • SHOWMESTATEGUY
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 3:53am

      The normal American has been trampled on by the liberal left of this country long enough. I just think a lot of normal Americans are getting tired of being forced fed the liberal soup.

      Report Post »  
    • RockinChuck
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 9:04am

      HEY! DeMint from S.C. pretty good too…lol

      Report Post » RockinChuck  
    • svan71
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 10:40am

      @American Soldier (Separated)

      absolutely infertile couples can get married as long as they are one man and one women and are not brother and sister. They hopefully will adopt and prevent a homosexual team from doing the same.

      Report Post » svan71  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 11:15am

      @RAWMILKER Thank you for the post..this is the first time I have seen it..keep getting the word out..

      Report Post »  
    • Patrick Henry II
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 11:22am

      I really like what Rand has to say. He also politically walks the talk. He is growing up, but not too much.

      Report Post » Patrick Henry II  
    • Look4DBigPicture
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 11:48am

      I agree wholeheartedly!

      We elected some amazing junior senators and house reps in 2010. We need to elect more like them in 2012, which is why I’m voting for TEA Party favorite Ted Cruz to replace outgoing Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. Hope other Texans are voting for him as well.

      Report Post »  
    • UnreconstructedLibertarian
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:56pm

      @Rawmilker and Ashes,

      Do you think the Neo-Con supporters will wake up when their heroes are revealed in support the “Reichstag” ploy? Both sides of the equation will do anything to maintain central control – and expand it.

      Wake up folks, our time is very short.

      Report Post » UnreconstructedLibertarian  
    • Look4DBigPicture
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:20pm

      @RAWMILKER … Thanks for the article – scary stuff.

      Your article led me to search for Farrakan’s speech about assassinating the president and I stumbled onto his comment about Andrew Adler. I somehow missed the Adler story in January and wanted to scream when I read it. What a dufus! Stupid comments like these only fertilize the seeds of hatred in Farrakan followers. Americans need to wake up, but for cryin’ out loud, those in the public eye need to use some common sense to know what is or is not an appropriate comment.

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/20/secret-service-investigating-jewish-newspaper-column-that-discussed-obama/

      BTW – Both Progressives and Conservatives were concerned about Bush enforcing martial law in 2006 and 2007. It‘s hard to know what’s real anymore, but I’m more willing to expect this kind of behavior from this administration than the previous one.

      Report Post »  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 2:00pm

      Rand is and will continue to follow in his dads footsteps. Soon his dad will be the nominee for the GOP. It will be a great day. Before all of you Lame Stream Media tunnell vision couch dwellers start bashing me, find out yourself by watching this interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNippJCbQqQ

      A Fox affilliate that actually understands what is happening. The media pundits on Fox, CNN, MSNBC and the rest, sound like they know what they are talking about, but are incompetent in their reporting of the primary process. Paul has more delegates than Romney and will continue to get the majority of delegates from the upcoming states. The voting has no bearing on the delegate outcome, the outcome is from those who get off their lazy butts and get involved in the process. We do have to thank all you Cain supporters,oh I mean, Perry supporters, oh I mean, Santorum supporters, oh, which one has the media steered you toward now? Oh yeah, Romney. We thank all you Romney supporters for not being informed or involved.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • lionslayer44
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 3:37pm

      @rawmilker take that one giant step further. when whites start fighting back the U.N. can declare that genocide is happening in the U.S. so they can send in the blue hats. the scenario you cite has been on my mind for quite a while. its becoming obvious how he plans to get there (OWS). there are many scenarios that all point in the same direction good luck all. BE PREPARED COLLECT FOOD, WATER (FILTERS), AMMO!!!! GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!! LS out!

      Report Post » lionslayer44  
    • TheShadowJr
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 4:15pm

      Dittos, I guess I am a Randian in more than one way.

      Report Post » TheShadowJr  
  • rhinockey
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:01pm

    14 states have Civil Unions (which I have no problem with) the problem I have is calling it Marriage. It‘s not marriage especially if you’re doing it for a tax credit or to shove it in the face of everybody who told you that you couldn’t do it. Just call it a Civil Union and let them have their fun. Also if you do a little research you will find that the “divorce” or “Separation” rate of Homosexual couples is MUCH higher than Heterosexuals..most Homosexual Civil Unions don’t last past 30 months.

    Report Post »  
    • Bluebonnet
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 11:07pm

      Just look at the number of gays in show biz and the Gov‘t and other well known ones who’ve changed
      partners time and again. You bet your pippy it’s not smart to marry a gay lover, just live together until you can’t stand each other and split the sheets, not all the legal stuff.

      Report Post »  
    • sealwifenyc
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:05am

      Stop making things up, stats on civil union divorces is almost non-existent, but the reputable stats that are available show the divorce rate is lower than the divorce rate of heterosexual marriages. http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/jan/23/gays-divorce-rates-may-hew-close-to-heterosexuals/

      Traditional marriage has a divorce rate of 50%, and when people get on their 3rd marriages it goes to 75%. The stats on cheating in traditional marriages is sky high, the rate of babies born to unwed mothers is sky high, and gay marriage is what is ruining marriages? What a freaking joke. Anyone who says gay marriage threatens their marriage has a ****** one, because two people who love each other and make a commitment is about the last thing that effects my marriage. My propensity for $500 shoes, is a lot bigger of a threat to my happy marriage. Although, I don’t know why I bother speaking common sense to the bible humpers, you guys live by the old “do as I say not as I do” golden rule.

      Report Post »  
    • mgcre
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:14am

      As the great philosopher Kinky Friedman answered, when he was asked if he believed in gay marriage: “I believe everyone has the right to be miserable.” LOL! – Classic!

      Report Post »  
    • gooeylewie
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:22am

      well, since a major special interest for Democrats are tort lawyers…

      I’ll let you figure out why the Democrats really support gay marriage. It has nothing to to with “rights” or “gay”.

      Report Post »  
    • American Soldier (Separated)
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:37am

      A rose by any other name…..

      Call it civil union or marriage, what does it really matter? It has the same meaning, it has the same benefits, and it has the same exact outcome. Why is everyone so hung up on what you call it? I was technically married, as recognized by the US Army, although I was only married by a judge. Was it a civil union? Was it a marriage? I didn’t care what you called it, It showed me commitment to another human being and provided with additional benefits within the military…

      ….. so who care what it’s actually called?

      Report Post » American Soldier (Separated)  
    • fatlibertarian
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 2:50am

      Since YOU think you can define MY MARRIAGE then I think we should make it ILLEGAL to get DIVORCED but only RUSH LIMBAUGH.

      Report Post »  
    • rangerp
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 7:18am

      American Soldier (Separated)

      I care what it is called.

      Shall we call cats dogs. Should we refer to cows as pigs. Do we call up to be down, east to be west. What other definitions do you want to change?

      A marriage is the union between a man and a woman. This has been the definition Biblically, historicall definition, and the legal definition. A union between a man and a man is disease spreading abomination, that is anti family, goes against the moral grain of society, and is destructive to nations and civilizations.

      You sodomites are hell bent on destroying the American family, and destroying the nation. You are not looking for equal rights, you are looking to change word meanings, get special treatment, and to spread your disfunctional, sick, and twisted life style. Once you do get the so called gay marriage, the next step will be to start lowering the age of concent, so you can start raping boys at a younger age.

      There is that period of history in the bible, after King david, where many kings were evil. You will find that the ones that were not evil, not only tore down the temples to false gods, they also tore down the dwelling places of the sodomites.

      Report Post » rangerp  
    • BrutalTruth
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 9:34am

      Ranger, your exactly correct.

      Funny how supporters of Homosexuality and of their desire to be included under the umbrella of “Marriage”, can’t even give a good reason.

      They claim “Love” or “Commitment” all the while denying their own natural bodily functions. Meaning procreation isn’t to be a determining factor. Which really means it’s about sex and not much more.

      If it is really about the “Commitment”, why can’t 3 or 4 or more also have the same “Commitment” to each other. Why not redefine Marriage to include more than 2? After all, who‘s to say that’s wrong?

      They knock themselves out trying to rebel without realizing they are all the while still, and always will be in bondage to natural law.

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 11:45am

      @SEALWIFENYC Actually..isn’t it about the gays getting marital benefits? Marriage was created by God between a man and a woman to keep us from sinnng..(fornicating) God told Adam and Eve to go forth and multiply.. God gave the people of Sodom and Gomorrah over to perverseness because they had turned their backs on Him..He also destroyed them..Christians would find marriage a mockery if homosexuals were allowed to “marry.” Gays will never be married in the sight of God..and Christians would find an institution which is at its core held sacred before God..sickening at best.to have gays mirror that institution..the institution which should mirror our sacred relationship with Him. Homosexuals probably hold some kind of romantic fantasy about marriage..when what they are doing is an abomination to our Creator..and remember this wife…one day..every knee shall bow..in heaven.on the earth..and in hell..and call Jesus…Lord..

      God..Jesus gave adultery as justification for divorce..

      Report Post »  
    • rhinockey
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:51pm

      sealwifenyc

      First of all, I don’t care for the Bible or any other book that tells one how to live their life. Secondly one small study done in Colombia by a newspaper has no effect on the 15 years of reasearch that have been done in Norway, Sweden, Uraguay and Recently the U.S. The Divorce rate for Homosexuals is near 85% and the overwhelming reason for this is: Because most Homosexuals get married for different reasons. Not for love, but for tax breaks and mutual property agreements or so they can adopt a child…NOT FOR LOVE. Just call it a Civil Union.

      Report Post »  
    • MONICNE
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 2:39pm

      @Seal Wife NYC
      Happy Mother’s day – you have one of the hardest jobs there is made tougher by your SEAL’s career. God Bless both of you and have a great day.

      We just spent our 30th anniversary spring break in New York and love your city.

      TEA – it’s about Taxes!

      Report Post » MONICNE  
    • rangerp
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 8:14pm

      sealwifenyc

      gays make up 2.5% of the population, and they commit a third of the nations child molestations, carry 64% of the nations syphilis, and were almost 70% of the new HIV cases last year.

      Go buy some more shoes, and stop trying to protect the sodomites

      Report Post » rangerp  
  • clockwatcher
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:24pm

    Nobama is not gay he only uses the gays to advance the gay anti christian cause. They give him money he helps them kill this nation. No matter he is gone in 175 days.

    Report Post » clockwatcher  
  • svan71
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:55pm

    sorry ianmc002 your age is defined by your birth certificate and marriage is defined 1 man 1 women.

    Report Post » svan71  
  • imsimsj1
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:41pm

    The problem for gay marriage is that people don’t like it because the church they go to has always told them it is wrong. This is not a church issue it is a government issue. If you are married in the eyes of the government and get tax breaks because of it has nothing to do with being maried in a church and being married in the eyes of the Lord. This is really two different things here. So if your church allows it and you do not like it go to a new church but since this is realy more about government issues I don’t see the big deal either way.

    Report Post »  
    • BOGOTSTOGO
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:59pm

      A marriage is 1 man and 1 women. Get over yourself!!! No christian Church will ever accept otherwise. Doing so would remove them from the Christian church category. Start your own church and make what ever sins you like acceptable within it.

      Report Post » BOGOTSTOGO  
    • svan71
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:02pm

      ok…what non religious society defined marriage as two men or two women?

      Report Post » svan71  
    • svan71
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:06pm

      we the people are the govt we the people vote and we the people vote no to gay marriage every time.

      Report Post » svan71  
    • stumpy68
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 11:23pm

      The government should get out of the marriage business
      it should issue everyone co-habitation agreements
      and let those who wish also get married by their religious leader
      marriage is a three way contract between a man a woman and god
      there is no room for government interference in it.

      Report Post » stumpy68  
    • wdittgasn
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:08am

      There are not two different things here, just one, Homosexuality is an abomination period, and it will bring the fire and brimstone upon us, period. All that agree with this nasty crap are beyond fools. Let the gays have their way and you will die with them!

      Report Post » wdittgasn  
    • American Soldier (Separated)
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:56am

      Fortunately, we are in a republic, not a democracy. The fatal flaw in democracy is clearly exampled by this issue and the poster above. It doesn’t matter if 90% of the people vote against gay marriage. As FREE Americans, they have the right to enter into a legal contract between to consenting adults. Call it a civil union or a marriage, all that matters is if the government recognizes it and allots the same benefit to them as they do to any other American bound in a similar fashion.

      Republic: Represented by laws (read; Constitution) so that the minority can be protected from the overwhelming majority (mob rule)

      Report Post » American Soldier (Separated)  
    • svan71
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 10:36am

      No the govt should not be in the business of redefining words to appease a selfish 1% minority at the expense of the entire society.

      Report Post » svan71  
  • ReturnVolleyFire
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:18pm

    I have an uncle who is gay. I love him. He’s a decent man in public conduct. And what he makes of his existence behind close doors is of little concern for me. However, I do have this issue. For me marriage represents what is most essential about humanity, and therefore what is good. Namely the propagation of the species. In this context it’s essence is best summed up in this term, marriage. A physical and spiritual coupling which consummates that union of two dissimilar organisms to the result of an absolutely divine, magical product. A third animated being! All under the stars most good for me has a Yin and yang. A positive +, and negative -, to = a balance. I have no desire to deny anybody anything. And my assessment need be nearly, if not completely, devoid of emotional weights and measures to be fully understood. I don’t believe marriage exists for homosexuals. Not because I have malice toward them, but because according to my understanding of it’s definition, it is an impossibility. I derive no pleasure or pain from this understanding. It just is. My solution for all those who disagree and must pursue their own life, liberty, and happiness is this. Let the merits of marriage in whatever form be their own reward. Let the government not bribe us in exercising preferable behaviors.Enter into a legal contract with whom you wish. Have your priest, pastor, rabbi, or shaman marry you before your own eternal judge. And leave me in peace to my own.

    Report Post »  
    • Chet Hempstead
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:02pm

      Gays may not be able to procreate with their partners, but they can certainly be parents and raise families. I always find it weird that when this topic comes up, people suddenly start talking as if procreation is the most important part of parenthood. It’s not; it’s the least. A lot of the problems we have in this country were caused by people who didn’t figure that out until it was too late.

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:18pm

      @CHET HEMSTED No..Gays should not be allowed to raise children..That is the most horrible thing to place chidren in a perverted twisted situtation like that..Life is hard enough..children deserved to be raised in a God fearing home..without the abomination to God to have to deal with.

      Report Post »  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:48am

      @Chet Smoking Hemp instead

      Light up your bong, take a big toke, sit back and let Sociacommiearxism rule your Life. You have no place among the Free.

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • American Soldier (Separated)
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:57am

      So should infertile people not be allowed to be married?

      Report Post » American Soldier (Separated)  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:49pm

      American Soldier – There’s a big difference between being infertile and being homosexual. Infertility is something physiological while there’s no evidence for homosexuality being born that way.

      Report Post »  
    • copper107
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:01pm

      Your post is very articulate and devoid of inflammatory language. Thank you for such a thoughtful and on spot comment!

      Report Post » copper107  
    • copper107
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:05pm

      @Reurnvolleyfire…..Your post is articulate, it doesn’t incite, it is thoughtful and spot on!!

      Report Post » copper107  
  • Ghandi was a Republican
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:09pm

    The solution is for Gays to get their own tradition. That would pizz off the proglinskyites big time. This whole argument is nothing but exploitation by the leftwing loons. I would call it fagiage myself. I would have no problem whatsoever with that.
    The alinsky leftwing loons come out the losers, as well as exposed for their false concern..

    Report Post » Ghandi was a Republican  
    • Chet Hempstead
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:02pm

      That’s not how you spell Gandhi.

      Report Post »  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:39am

      @Chet Hempstead
      “That’s not how you spell Gandhi.”

      And that’s not how others spell Hemp Head….

      Report Post » The-Monk  
  • The Third Archon
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:05pm

    ““Call me cynical, but I wasn’t sure his views on marriage could get any gayer,” he said at an Iowa Faith & Freedom event.”
    Well actually they could–he could actually be committed to DO something about it. Substantively, his position is no different than Republicans, since choosing to do nothing (regardless of how you feel) at the federal level so that states can carry out discrimination at their level, is for all and intents and purposes no different than just being outright for the discrimination–the net effect is no different.

    “Paul added that he’s not not out to preach any “hateful dogma” against people with his opposition to same-sex marriage, but said that “doesn’t mean we have to go up and give up our traditions.”
    Just because we‘ve done something a particular way in the past doesn’t mean that’s a good reason in its own sake to keep doing it.

    Report Post » The Third Archon  
    • Ghandi was a Republican
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:33pm

      Why would anyone WANT to do something or anything? The reality it is the whole thing is manufactured for divisiveness. There is no such thing as Gay Marriage. Nobody argues that there is. There is not. Never was! Your argument is juvenile and highly indoctrinated rubbish.
      Just because you CAN change something doesn’t mean you should. Why take marriage away as a hetero institution when you can get your own? Reason: Pure politics of division and exploitation!

      Report Post » Ghandi was a Republican  
    • chazmo
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:13pm

      @GWAR because what this really is about is FORCING the Church, once again, to do what their teachings say not to do. If some law makes it “legal” for gays to marry then they will sue the Churches to Marry them. They will tell you that that would never happen. Yeah right we all know that it will.. All you have to do is look at Health Care. It’s about time the Churches break from the Teet of the Government. No more tax breaks. Render unto Ceasar. I will donate even without the tax breaks. Are the you willing to?

      Report Post » chazmo  
    • binge_thinker
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:08pm

      GWAR

      The people that say that gay “marriage” doesn’t have consequesnces are just flat-out liars and nothing more. Unnatural marriaget affected the Catholic Adoption Services of Massachusetts. They were forced to close down or give babies to homosexuals against their beliefs. It affected a baker in Iowa who didn’t want to bake a cake for a lesbian couple, so he was targeted, threatened, and intimidated because of that and also, it affected the Episcopal Wedding facility in New Jersey that didn’t want to host a gay receptions and because of that they were threatened and targeted by the militant gay lobby.
      Not one single thing about these people are “tolerant”

      Report Post » binge_thinker  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:11pm

      I think when Ron Paul was pushed up against the wall on this..he said he believed that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman..period..

      Report Post »  
    • The Third Archon
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:21pm

      “Forcing” is a good word for it–as in, “forcing your religion-specific conception of morality down everyone elses throat by codifying it.” Take away the Bible and what REASON left is there to tell homosexuals who want to be married (you don’t have to believe they exist, but they do) and are citizens, and DO have the right to be married legally in the status quo just apparently not to each other, that they can’t, or that their relationships are somehow legally different and less worth equal protection under the laws of a government for ALL the people, not just its straight citizens, not just its “Christian” citizens? The answer is there is none–not in a government the strives to practice an equal treatment under the law for all citizens, that is secular in character, and that wishes to avoid arbitrary discrimination (i.e. that lacking a compelling justification, done for its own sake, or for the sake of “tradition,” or one of a number of fallacies).

      Report Post » The Third Archon  
    • The Third Archon
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:26pm

      @BINGE
      Both of the examples you gave are of people who wouldn’t have been “targeted” in the first place had they not been discriminating (in violation of democratically constituted laws I might add) against homosexuals. Is that the best you can come up with? That people are having the right to arbitrarily discriminate taken away to which they were never legally (much less MORALLY) entitled to in the first place? Yeah, what a LOSS to our polity that people might, GOD FORBID, have to start acting humanely towards one another.

      Report Post » The Third Archon  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:35pm

      Marriage is a Christian concept..it is not a secular one…God is the one who created and ordained the marriage covenant and it mirrors what our relationship should be with Him..Homosexuality is an abomination to Him..he hates it..I remember you saying you tried the Christian route for awhile..Do you remember the story of Sodom and Gomorrah? For they had turned their backs on God and no did not give Him praise and did not give Him thanks and He turned them over to perversness..The men of Sodom came to rape the angels that were with Lot..and Lot offered them his daughters..but they wanted the angels and the angels blinded them..God will not be mocked..And although you no longer believe in Him..I believe most Christians fear God’s wrath. Homosexuality is a spirit..an evil one A friend of mine was told by a homosexual that it is the hardest thing to get away from..Only God can deliver someone of that demon.

      Report Post »  
    • The Third Archon
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 11:08pm

      So people didn’t get married before sometime around 200 A.D. when the Nicene Council got together and put together the Bible?

      Regardless, whether they invented marriage or not, it’s the height of ridiculousness to think Christians have the right, or the power, to enforce their “claim” to marriage as their “intellectual property.” The government can, will, and must come up with its own laws to define and sanction social institutions. You give a good story, one I am familiar with, but still haven’t addressed the same old problem with religion and all claims to special authority–you haven’t yet JUSTIFIED what makes YOUR claim special, why YOUR story is true, when SO MANY others have claimed JUST AS MUCH if not more, and have been wrong before, and will be wrong in the future. Until you have given at least SOME objective proof of why Christianity is at least more LIKELY true than alternatives, there’s no reason (and every reason NOT) to base public policy on thousands year old “moral” authorities which, in the absence of proof otherwise, just as likely as not came from humans.

      Report Post » The Third Archon  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 1:01am

      @The Third Archon
      ““Call me cynical, but….”

      I’m just going to call you cynical butt… Another brown star on your sissy chart. Pucker up and kiss your Master 3rd… Obama is your Master.

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 2:06am

      @THIRD ARCHON..The Bible was just created by the Nicene Church?..hardly..The Bible was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit by over 40 different authors from all walks of life: shepherds, farmers, tent-makers, physicians, fishermen, priests, philosophers and kings. Despite these differences in occupation and the span of years it took to write it, the Bible is an extremely cohesive and unified book.. The author who contributed the most books to the Old Testament was Moses. He wrote the first five books of the Bible, referred to as the Pentateuch; the foundation of the Bible. The Apostle. Paul contributed the most books (14) to the New Testament. Many scholars agree that Job is the oldest book in the Bible, written by an unknown Israelite about 1500 B.C. Others hold that the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) are the oldest books in the Bible, written between 1446 and 1406 B.C. The first gays I have ever heard of were the ones in the Bible..It didn’t turn out well for them..THe Bible is the living word of God.Jesus is called the Word. He was creating with God from the foundations of the world. At the end of his life..Mohammed had hoped his people would come to accept the deity of Christ because of His virgin birth..

      Report Post »  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 2:33pm

      Ashes, another point on Paul’s position that we cannot forget is his constitutional stance. “It is not up to the government to determine these matters, it should be left to the church.” By leaving it up to the church, we know that biblical reference is that marriage is between a man and woman. If a church takes a different stance, they will either get more people into their church or lose a lot of people from their church. That is constitutional and leaves everything up to the people to decide if they want to continue with a particular church or not.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • binge_thinker
      Posted on May 14, 2012 at 1:15pm

      Archon,
      There is not one word in the U.S. Constitution that authorizes gay marriage. There were plenty of homosexuals back then too, so if our founders truly wanted to protect such a unnatural behavior they had every opportunity to do so, the fact that they did not speaks volumes.
      It never ceases to amaze me as to what people will agree with if they hear it enough. Most of this country has laid down and accepted bans on cigarette smoke in virtually every public space as well as restaurants (and I’m a non-smoker, btw). Now, we’re told that – gasp! – anyone who believes preserving marriage as between those of the opposite sex is bigoted or worse. Put this in context for a moment: can you imagine someone being asked in 1980, for instance, what marriage was? If their answer was “a husband and wife”, they should be viewed as bigoted? Haters? If this issue was so obvious as the media and zealots like you tells us it is, then why has virtually no great moral thinker ever mentioned it until the past 20 years or so? This was never the case with slavery, racism, sexism, or any other great social issue I can think of. How did everyone miss it for so long?
      Redefining marriage does not add to the definition; it detracts from it.It also supports the idea that men & women are the same, and offer no unique qualities in comparison to the other. This notion, in particular, has proven damaging over time to notions of masculinity as well as femininity in our culture with awfull effec

      Report Post » binge_thinker  
    • binge_thinker
      Posted on May 14, 2012 at 1:19pm

      Treat people “humanely” as you say?
      I guess this is the type of “humane” treatment we can expect from the ssm supporters and their ilk.
      http://massresistance.org/

      Report Post » binge_thinker  
  • moussiagilda
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:29pm

    That sounds like Rand Paul in what-the-hell mode. If he did actually say that.

    Report Post »  
  • Git-R-Done
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:23pm

    Anybody who didn‘t laugh at Rand Paul saying that Obama’s views couldn’t get any gayer has no sense of humor.

    Report Post »  
  • dannyo
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:56pm

    adam, as hard as he may try, can never get steve pregnant the way he could eve…enough said…

    Report Post »  
  • The-Monk
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:26pm

    “Call me cynical, but I wasn’t sure his views on marriage could get any gayer,”

    What’s next… “Gayer Asprin”? Oh the shame…..

    Report Post » The-Monk  
  • ianmc002
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:24pm

    Do you believe in freedom? Do you believe that you should be able to do what you want to (as long as it does not affect another persons life, liberty, etc)? Then you support the rights for gays to marry. Despite your personal feelings or religion we should ALL support their right to be married just as an opposite sex couple has that right.

    In addition you do NOT support SS, Medicare, or Medicaid since these are FORCED upon us. Wake up people…you and I may not like the idea of gay marriage, but who are you/we to dictate their rights? We should all be fighting on their behalf. On behalf of FREEDOM.

    Report Post » ianmc002  
    • wvgirl
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:55pm

      And because of that FREEDOM you LOVE so much, I‘m guessing you’re going to support my right to NOT AGREE with homosexual marriage and shoving it down our throats in the public school system, from kindergarden on up, in the media, in the work place, in the courts of liberal, legislating judges, etc. This is America, folks, where EVERYONE is free to worship as they choose without persecution from HETEROPHOBES.

      Report Post »  
    • dennisS
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:59pm

      No, the issue is morality. Do you want the freedom to kill anyone that you want, rape them, steal from them, have sex with children, the list goes on. Now I know what you are going to say, they aren’t hurting anyone. Yes they are, they are changing the definition of morality that has existed since the beginning of time and turning it upside down. If this is the future, your children will grow up believing that society has the right to enact new sets of morals outside those mandated by God. The Nazis believed this, the Communists also, they could change the definition of right or wrong merely by passing a law that made it legal to kill anyone they disagreed with. RETHINK your position, it’s a slippery slope to perdition!

      Report Post »  
    • dannyo
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:01pm

      in the regard, ian, i can marry my dog, rabbit, tadpole (and frog when the day comes), ten or so women, ten or so men, etc etc, all at the same time, who are you to tell me i can’t, ian??

      Report Post »  
    • inblack
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:13pm

      @IANMC002

      I’m sorry, but their love alone does not make marriage.

      Marriage is a relationship between a man and woman to make children, not a statement of someones love.

      I do not care to tell people what them must do – they have free will and freedom to make their own choices, but it is not marriage.

      You can tell me you want to believe you are a unicorn, but while I can‘t and won’t stop you, I will not play along. I will not call you a unicorn and I will not give you a govt provided unicorn parking spot downtown.

      This game of calling a man a woman or calling gay commitments marriage is just that, a game. Marriage already has a definition, it already means something. We cannot pretend it means something else just to make you happy.

      I have an idea, I will call myself 67 and start taking Social Security benefits. If you believe in freedom, who are you to tell me I’m not 67? Who are you to deny me these benefits?

      Report Post »  
    • Go-rin-no-sho
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:21pm

      It certainly is a slippery slope issue, but I think most people who understand freedom, understand that you can’t have government forcefully separating gay couples. However on the other side of the coin, is it right for one type of couple, a heterosexual couple, to receive marriage benefits and tax credits, while a gay couple does not? The real solution to me, is to get the government out of marriage altogether. That way gay couples seeking gay marriage for the money will not exist, churches will be free to marry together whomever they see fit as it is their business, and no one’s freedom is squelched.

      Report Post » Go-rin-no-sho  
    • inblack
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:37pm

      @GO-RIN-NO-SHO

      While I agree that I’d rather have the govt stop handing out benefits to any people, what is it that you don’t get that a married couple is different from a gay couple or two friends living together?

      Marriage is not a feeling, it is not cohabitation, it is not exclusive sex. It is a man and a woman who commit to stay together to raise children – a family.

      Has the media reprogrammed your brain so that you cannot grasp the biological pair bonding and societal family unit concepts?

      The number of children born outside of a real family is skyrocketing. That is hurting children, it is destroying western civilization.

      While I won’t force people to get married and have children in a two parent family, I also will not pretend that it does not matter and I will not vote to undermine the family just to pretend that gay people who love each other is somehow the same thing as the married family.

      Report Post »  
    • Tallaron
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:42pm

      They can have Civil Unions and attain the same rights as a married couple. We don’t have to change our traditions or our definitions of words to please them. I do believe that they have an effect on children and others and heres why….A gay gets to share showers and the bathroom with the same sex that they love, and that bothers me and others I’m sure. I’ve had 3 in my family all males by marrying a family female probably just to have children. In all 3 cases they had a male child 1st and that 1st ended up Gay also…the others did not. The 2 young gay fathers ended up getting divorced and going off doing their thing with males. Wife’s had stopped getting attention period from them. The other was in his later years and so he was pretty much done running around like he use to and I believed married to please his Father. So yes others were hurt and something weird must have been going on with that 1st child. Have you ever seen a Gay Parade…well that’s not normal in my book…but I’m cool with it they are cool with what I believe in to.

      Report Post »  
    • ianmc002
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:44pm

      @inblack

      I don’t care what your stance on the issue is…it is NOT your right to dictate other peoples rights. Clearly we are not all created equal now are we? How about the right to be left alone? Let them do as they want, I care not if it does not affect me or my liberty or anothers.

      “I have an idea, I will call myself 67 and start taking Social Security benefits. If you believe in freedom, who are you to tell me I’m not 67? Who are you to deny me these benefits?”
      Now, now isn’t that affecting others liberty? Are we not forced to pay in to help fund your ponzi-scheme retirement?

      Look as much as we dislike gay marriage…it should be about treating people equally. Clearly they are not treated equal and we should all be fighting for that freedom and that equality no matter how you feel about those **** jk. lol Our freedom should mean that we fight for everybody’s freedom no matter what our personal feelings may be. As long as it does not affect me and my liberty you should be free to do whatever you want. I side with the gays on this issue even though I haven’t decided how I feel about the issue.

      Report Post » ianmc002  
    • rawmilker
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:50pm

      Well said DENNISS….let them have all the freedom they want amongst thmselves, but this is about morality. marriage is a religious vow between man and woman, males and females were put here to unite and raise a family, . to love and to hold, to have offspring in the name of humanity and to contribute to the human race….No matter how you look at it, there just ain’t no way a gay couple is ever going to contribute to having offspring…

      Report Post » rawmilker  
    • inblack
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:27pm

      @IANMC002

      Here is the problem. It does effect others if gays are called married. He is just one – They would immediately get marriage survivor benefits from Social Security. This of course would hasten the bankruptcy of Social security.

      Why do we offer marriage survivor benefits? We offer it because it supports the family that has and raises children. You might say, well we shouldn’t have special benefits for married people, but they are there.

      Gay people can do whatever they want and should get equal protection under the law, but by redefining marriage, they are getting NEW benefits like SS, medicare, food stamps, etc.

      So the definition does matter. The intended SPECIAL benefits are not there to reward love, commitment or monogamy. They are there to offset the costs of creating the next generation.

      That is not denying equal benefits, it is recognizing the difference between sterile and productive relationships and ones where there is a commitment to stay together and raise children.

      These special benefits are there for old people, children, handicapped people, veterans and yes married people. In each case they recognize a need. What is the special need of gay people?

      Report Post »  
    • inblack
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:37pm

      BTW, IANMC002

      I do not want to break up gay couples or tell them how to live. I just don’t want to bestow special rights to them.

      You seem to think that married benefits are intended for any two people that will pronounce their love for each other. What about pronouncing your love makes you need new govt handouts?

      Report Post »  
    • Do Not Mess With Us Texas Proud
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:24pm

      First there is no right to marry for anyone hetro or homosexual. Many people do not ever get married for numerous reasons. I am very tired of people continuously manufacturing new rights. According to libs if it is something they want it magically becomes a right. Wrong. Also homosexuality is a genetic abortion nothing to be celebrated. There is nothing gay about homosexuality gay men on average die younger than heterosexual men. Not sure but may have something to do with their nasty lifestyle. Also ask some older gay men how they control their anal leakage ………They have to put a tampon up their rears. Sounds like a lifestyle that should be pitied not celebrated.

      Report Post »  
    • dennisS
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:55pm

      IANMCOO2, you just don’t get it. This has nothing to do with freedom, rights or any other misconceptions that you seem to have. It is a moral issue. That takes it outside the realm of these other issues. You have no right to change what is moral. Morals are eternal and no one can change them. Homosexuality is IMMORAL, period! Go ahead and make the case that homosexuality is moral and right, and then we can address the marriage issue between homosexuals. If you can’t prove the morality of homosexuality then you have no case.

      Report Post »  
    • techengineer11
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:56pm

      ianmc002: Homosexuality is a sick peverted nasty disease. A natural person can not even think on the topic without becoming nauseated.

      Report Post » techengineer11  
    • sealwifenyc
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:28am

      Inblack- That is ridiculous. I am a woman married to a man, and we don’t have children and are not planning on it, that doesn’t make it any less of a marriage. In fact, its a much healthier and happier marriage than a lot of the couples we know who have children.

      Report Post »  
    • DIR
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 12:49am

      INBLACK good post.

      Basterdizing marriage might be compared to letting girls into the boy scouts or boys into the girl scouts.. Once done the boyscouts would no longer exist. Girls aren’t boys! It would then be the unisex scouts, or some like name. The boy scouts is for boys, not boys and girls. Marriage is for the union of a man and a woman as described by ‘INBLACK.’

      Freedom, in this country, doesn’t give gays the right or freedom to marry one another. Just as freedom doesn’t give someone the right or the freedom to kill another, or molest a child or destroy others property and the list goes on. For those who think freedom means people can do as they please, need to get an understanding of freedom as defined by the constitution and laws of this Country. They might also want to brush up on moral law, natural law, Constitutional law, the law in general, philosophy and various other principles and concepts that govern humanity.

      Report Post »  
    • BrutalTruth
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 8:47am

      Sealwife : In fact, its a much healthier and happier marriage than a lot of the couples we know who have children.

      Unless you’ve been a natural mother/father, you have no idea what it means and does to you. If you think about it for a moment, you would realize your whole position stated above is from the standpoint of ignorance. You claim to have insight into something you have self proclaimed to have never experienced yourself.

      I have been a childless adult and I have been the child blessed adult and the two are not the same.

      My intention is not to be harsh. You may want to consider this.

      Report Post »  
    • inblack
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 10:16am

      @SEALWIFENYC

      1) What is your point? That since your marriage is not productive that gay couples should be called married? or That because your marriage is purposely unproductive, that you do not deserve to get married benefits?

      The fact that you chose not to have kids does not change the purpose of marriage or the reason we provide benefits to married couples. You are just the case of undeserving benefits.

      2) Your other point is a fallacy. Because your marriage is not the worst one you know of does not make any point. I am 6′ 4″, but I am not the tallest person I know, none-the-less I am 6′ 4″ and considered tall. If I told people that I know people taller than me so therefore I am not tall, they would laugh.

      3) I think this point was made, but you are arguing from ignorance. Since you have no children, you cannot tell people how your fulfillment compares to people with children. Period. A better argument would be 90% of my married friends with children tell me they were happier married without children. As one data point, raising children has been the most fulfilling event in my life.

      But this strawman is off topic anyway. No one based an argument on happiness and your out of the blue protest that you are happier than the worst married couples you know sounds like rationalization.

      That said, I do not mean to be rude or insulting, I just don’t think that your testimony of a happy fruitless marriage should be taken as an argument for gay marria

      Report Post »  
    • MONICNE
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 2:49pm

      @ Seal Wife NYC

      Stand Your Ground! I am proud that in the USA, you and your SEAL have every marital right as a we birth moms and our husbands do, whether or not you have children! Sincerely hope you both enjoy mother’s day- and father’s day as proud Americans.

      TEA

      Report Post » MONICNE  
    • ianmc002
      Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:02pm

      I’ve gotta laugh at the ignorance here. I don’t care what the f!@& you call it, or what they call it. I don’t care what your personal or religious beliefs are. It is NOT your right to DICTATE to others what their rights are. People should be FREE to do whatever they want to do (as long as it does not affect anothers rights), which means you’re NOT free to kill someone MORON. Everybody who believes on FREEDOM needs to FIGHT on behalf of the gays. I don’t care what your stance is, you do NOT have the right to dictate others rights PERIOD.

      Why are people so fn stupid?

      Report Post » ianmc002  
  • Abraham Young
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:11pm

    I found Obama mentioned in the Book of Mormon:

    Mosiah 29:23

    23 And he enacteth laws, and sendeth them forth among his people, yea, laws after the manner of his own wickedness; and whosoever doth not obey his laws he causeth to be destroyed; and whosoever doth rebel against him he will send his armies against them to war, and if he can he will destroy them; and thus an unrighteous king doth pervert the ways of all righteousness.

    Report Post »  
  • 1Greensix
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:05pm

    There is NO way Rick Santorum and Rand Paul aren’t gay. No one comes out that strongly against gays unless they are, and want to be thought of as not gay. Just like no one hates tobacco more than an ex-smoker. And J. Edgar Hoover hated criminals. While being one himself. These guys are both gays as shi….. We just have to wait for the closet door to open and out they’ll pop, high heels and a tasteful, off the shoulder, eveing gown.

    Report Post »  
    • Abraham Young
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:15pm

      I found the Obamanites in the book of mormon:

      Mosiah 29:23

      23 And he enacteth laws, and sendeth them forth among his people, yea, laws after the manner of his own wickedness; and whosoever doth not obey his laws he causeth to be destroyed; and whosoever doth rebel against him he will send his armies against them to war, and if he can he will destroy them; and thus an unrighteous king doth pervert the ways of all righteousness.

      Report Post »  
    • P C BE DAMNED
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:30pm

      1greenfool

      You make me sick and are the worst of all human vermin. I once was young and took strong stands against queers and some would say the same thing you just said. Well now I am old and guess what I am still a strait normal human being. I have never got a hard on for any man. You make me sick. I would destroy you in one second if I new I could get away with it. Otherwise I’ll just let you destroy yourself. What a sick perverted human being you must be. And yes I hate people like you. I hate queers, necromancers, wife beaters, child molesters, real racists , liars, murderers, fools etc…..Which one are you? Fool, you are cursed and not one thing you ever do from this moment on will prosper. Now eat shi t which I know you do anyway, and fall at my feet and die.

      Report Post » P C BE DAMNED  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:32pm

      @Greensix

      And since you hate both Rick Santorum and Rand Paul so much you must be a?????

      Take a “Gayer Asprin” and call me in the morning. BTW… a big brown star on your sissy chart; right next to 3rd Archon.

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • Weiners Wiener
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:34pm

      That doesn’t make any sense at all. Pure armchair psychobabble BS. I’m a straight ex-smoker, but I oppose gays and miss cigarettes. your hypothesis sucks. In fact, I saw a study somewhere that touched on what you’re doing — it said people like you are responsible for many myths in our culture because you blame all behaviour you disagree with on some sort of ‘projecting’ that just isn’t founded in any kind of scientific reality. Knock yourself out.

      Report Post »  
    • Constructionist
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:49pm

      I assume then that all the militantly anti-religious atheists are closeted fundamentalists?

      Report Post » Constructionist  
    • inblack
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:04pm

      @GREENSICK

      Is this what passes for logic among your marxist friends. I always wondered how libs can be so stupid, but you’re a great example of the mental defect that is liberalism.

      I’ll put this is simple terms:
      Marriage was created for making babies and holding the parents together to raise those babies.

      This idea that marriage is a statement of your love for another person is wrong – that is not really marriage. In fact, in some groups, couples who say they want to get married, but will NOT accept children will be refused marriage.

      I don’t hate gay people, but I will not lie and pretend that marriage is something it is not, just to make them happy. Gay relationships, even with exclusive commitment just isn’t marriage. Period.

      It’s just like the transgender lie. If you change your gender from a woman to a man, you are still not a man. This is just a cruel denial of fact that weak minded liberals want to believe.

      Report Post »  
    • toddgibbs
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:54pm

      The fact that YOU are able to spot this makes you…….GAY?

      Report Post » toddgibbs  
  • progressiveslayer
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:48pm

    Gotta love Rand Paul telling it like it is,Ron Paul would have been a better president than the soon to be president Romney but that‘s what we’re stuck with. The Marxist POS has to go for the sake of the republic.

    Report Post » progressiveslayer  
  • Kondratievwave
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:42pm

    I like Rand Paul, His dads relationship with Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell are a little unnerving. I have hopes that Rand will be more of a John Stossel type Libertarian and less of a Murray Rothbard.

    Report Post » Kondratievwave  
    • TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:57pm

      I hope so also… But he DID grow up with this tutelage and ideology all around him. Let‘s hope he’s smarter than the old man.

      Report Post » TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12  
    • Abraham Young
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:17pm

      I”ve actually read Murray Rothbard.

      When the revolution fails we will have a strong society flourishing under Austrian economics, Friedman, and Rothbard philosophies.

      But most of all we will relish the truths of Adam Smith.

      Report Post »  
    • TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:27pm

      YOUNG. Rothbard was a racist and an anarcho-capitalist. Racism and unwholesome greed… now THAT’s a combination we should ALL get behind right?

      Report Post » TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12  
    • inblack
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:28pm

      @TIME_2_END

      Give it up a hole.

      If you ever listened to Rothbard, you can understand the truth in what he says without buying into every word he says or every thought he holds.

      Your lies of racism and Ron Paul character assassination are getting old.

      You obviously hate everything about Ron Paul and are willing to say anything to try to turn people against him. So fine, we get it, you don’t like Ron Paul.

      I do like Ron Paul. I think he is one of the only people running for president that is consistent and will tell you the truth about what he believes.

      Is he pro-life? Yes. He always says so, he refused to give abortions, he has a consistent record.
      Is he for small govt? Yes. He has committed to slash govt.
      Is he against foreign intervention? Yes, he voted for war when the US was attacked, but not for continuous war.
      Is he for equal rights for all people? Yes, he has voted for equal rights and no special rights for all people.
      Is he a racist? No. He has stated that racism is a collectivist idea and he only believes in the individual.

      Ron Paul is consistent in what he says, does and votes. His ideas are consistent with one another.

      So why do you hate Ron Paul? Why do you hate him so much that you set your user name to a commitment to destroy him? Is it that he is a champion for liberty?

      ——-
      Maximum Freedom, Minimum Government

      Report Post »  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:55pm

      INBLACK Well done you stated Paul’s positions clearly and he is the best candidate,he always votes consistent with the constitution and some people have a problem with that,they don’t understand liberty and freedom from government.

      Report Post » progressiveslayer  
    • therealconservative
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:15pm

      @inblack

      Is Ron Paul for open borders? Yes

      “The one thing I have resisted and condemned: I do not believe that barbed-wire fences and guns on our border will solve any of our problems,”

      Report Post » therealconservative  
    • TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 8:34pm

      Tsk, tsk, tsk… you’re being disingenous…

      But as usual, I will set you on a path to righteousness and truth. Btw, read along Airman Basic SLAYER…

      Murray Rothbard was the student of Ludwig Von Mises. Rothbard was a racist, and believed in the “voluntary” separation of the races. And it’s been argued that Mises, was an elitist with fascist tendencies. This part of libertarian history is a part that the libertarians and Ron Paul acolytes would like to cover up. It slips out at times and has done so with Ron Paul, Rand Paul and others.

      Rothbard spoke kindly of David Duke the KKK political office seeker. Disaffected libertarians were dismayed that Rothbard would seek to align himself with a pure racist just because he believed in limited government. The only reason that Rothbard did not back a separate state for blacks was because he was afraid it would cost too much in “foreign aid”.

      I could go on and on and on and on and…. but I won‘t as you already know the truth and just choose to deny it for little Ronnie Paul’s BS cause celeb.

      Report Post » TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12  
    • inblack
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:03pm

      @THEREALCONSERVATIVE

      Communication on a forum like this is hard. I’m assuming that you are saying that Ron Paul is against a border fence and that is the same thing as being for an open border.

      Please look at his website – his position is clear. ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/immigration/

      I think if you look at what he said on Sept 7, 2011, he made two points. One, we have created incentives for people to come here illegally. We provide free education, welfare and walk in benefits at the emergency room. If we want to stop illegal immigration we need to remove the incentive as well as protect our own border.

      The second point is new. With the advent of national socialist / marxist policy under Obama, he is now worried that a barb-wire fences and machine guns could be used to keep us in the country. This is a valid concern given that EU countries have made currency and capital flight illegal and the Obama administration has already suggested preventing Americans from moving their assets out of the country.

      While this may be a new concern, I do not think it is inconsistent with his position of liberty. He is still for enforcing border security, he has just raised a concern about a wall that could be used to keep us in.

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:25pm

      @IN BLACK..I have concerns about a wall being built cutting the “benefits..welfare.healthcare,,and education could go a long way ..We currently spend 338.3 billion on illegals each year..A wall would cost a fortune..cut off the cookie jar and they will go away…I also understand that Paul wants to bring our troops home to police our borders.. Great idea. I just saw today that some democratic Congressmen have proposed a bill to make it illegal to defend ourselves.

      Report Post »  
    • cous1933
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 11:25pm

      Time_2 obviously gets a lot of his dis-information from Gary Anderson, who contributes (bad) articles on Business Insider. Anderson has a strong dislike of libertarianism. In an article Anderson wrote explaining his dislike – what he really reveals is his latent socialist tendencies. Anderson hates libertarians (according to his own article) because they are so greedy that they don’t want the federal government to give financial aid to disaster victims.
      It is true that libertarians don’t support FEMA and other big-government programs that aren’t among the enumerated powers of the federal government, but that doesn’t mean they are greedy. It means they understand the Constitution.
      Anderson, Time_2, and those that share Anderson’s position should read this…

      http://notyourstogive.com/

      Anderson makes frequent collectivist-type assumptions about libertarians implying that every flaw that he finds in one libertarian is true of all libertarians. Sort of like Time_2 does with Ron Paul supporters. This reluctance to think of people in individual terms rather than collective or group terms is what leads to progressivism and socialism. Anderson and Time_2 take a few controversial remarks made by Rothbard as evidence that he was racist (despite the fact that Rothbard himself called racism a “revolt against reason”). Ron Paul has explained that racism is collectivist thinking and that libertarians think in terms of individuals and want liberty for every individual.

      Report Post » cous1933  
    • cous1933
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 11:38pm

      @therealconservative,

      You should learn Ron Paul’s positions before you mis-represent. Here is his Immigration policy copied and pasted from his own web-site……..

      If elected President, Ron Paul will work to implement the following common sense reforms:

      * Enforce Border Security – America should be guarding her own borders and enforcing her own laws instead of policing the world and implementing UN mandates.

      * No Amnesty – The Obama Administration’s endorsement of so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, will only encourage more law-breaking.

      * Abolish the Welfare State – Taxpayers cannot continue to pay the high costs to sustain this powerful incentive for illegal immigration. As Milton Friedman famously said, you can’t have open borders and a welfare state.

      * End Birthright Citizenship – As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be granted U.S. citizenship, we’ll never be able to control our immigration problem.

      * Protect Lawful Immigrants – As President, Ron Paul will encourage legal immigration by streamlining the entry process without rewarding lawbreakers.

      As long as our borders remain wide open, the security and safety of the American people are at stake.

      As President, Ron Paul will address immigration by fighting for effective solutions that protect our nation, uphold the rule of law, and respect every American citizen’s civil libert

      Report Post » cous1933  
    • therealconservative
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 3:04am

      @cous

      “Here is his Immigration policy copied and pasted from his own web-site……..”

      And I copied and pasted what Ron Paul said in a speech giving to a group called “Hispanics in Politics”, in Nevada on 1 Feb 12.

      Report Post » therealconservative  
    • TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 8:37am

      COUSCOUSE. I could present TONS of reading material regarding Rothbard/Rockwell and racism/anti-Semitism/homophobia etc… not to mention other trash which Rothbard wrote… even concerning Ronald Reagan.

      reason.com: Who Wrote Ron Paul’s Newsletters? http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/who-wrote-ron-pauls-newsletter

      Rothbard was proud to be a ‘racialist’ because racialism exposed the true source of inequality in a free market, namely genetics. A belief in biological racial inequality was, for Rothbard, part of the libertarian project, because racial inequality was simply how markets reflected nature. Moreover, this was no sudden conversion: Rothbard promoted the same view, as early as 1973.

      Rothbard’s article was published in the Rockwell Rothbard Report. His partner in that journal, Lew Rockwell, is the founder and Chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Rothbard and Rockwell were involved in Ron Paul’s 1988 Presidential election campaign. In early 2008, this article revealed that “a half-dozen longtime libertarian activists—including some still close to Paul“ had identified Rockwell as the ”chief ghostwriter“ of the Ron Paul newsletters published from ”roughly 1989 to 1994.”

      Report Post » TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12  
    • EndTheFedNOW
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 3:40pm

      TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12

      You idiot. All the political parties have racisim in their pasts. More than anyone is the dumbass republicans. Weather its margret sanger speaking to the KKK or anyone back in those days. Your a moron.

      Report Post » EndTheFedNOW  
    • cous1933
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 8:43pm

      @therealconservative,

      I don‘t deny that Paul said that barbed wire fences won’t solve our problems – he’s absolutely right about that. What’s disingenuous is pretending that that is the sum of his immigration policy, or that somehow means that he is soft on illegal immigration. Nothing could be further from the truth. If you read his entire policy, you see that he is as tough on illegal immigration as any candidate in recent history.

      Report Post » cous1933  
    • cous1933
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 9:13pm

      Time_2,

      I’m aware of the fact that both Rothbard and Rockwell have made statements or wrote opinions regarding race that might be considered controversial or even offensive – especially to those who buy into the politically correct, hyper-sensitive, race baiters who charge racism towards everyone who would dare to say anything that is less than flattering towards any black person.
      This is nonsense, and the fact that you and other libertarian haters try to implicate Ron Paul as a racist is every bit as pathetic as the garbage spewed by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

      Do you despise Abraham Lincoln who said things that would be considered far more racially offensive than anything Rothbard ever said?
      I personally am a great admirer of Thomas Jefferson and despite the fact that he owned slaves and wrote descriptions of the black race that would today be very offensive to the hyper-sensitive, not only would I not consider Jefferson to be racist, but I find him to be one of the most moral historical figures ever.
      I suppose your next move will be to call me racist because I don’t consider Rothbard, Rockwell, or Paul racists at all. Their priority is, and always has been, liberty, and free market capitalism for every individual regardless of race. The racist charges are a red herring, an attempt to discredit them and change the subject because their true message of liberty and prosperity is too scary for those who want to keep control of others.

      Report Post » cous1933  
  • joyscar
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:36pm

    What a raging bunch of HOMOPHOBES!!! Wow! You’re not even talking about a real issue here- just a bunch of bigoted asses who haven’t the intellegence to speak to any issue with any substance because you have no substance to begin with. If you want to attack Barrack Obama on something, why not discuss a real issue? He has a wife and two children and has been happily married for many years. He has many gay friends, which- HERES A NEWSFLASH, SO PAY ATTENTION- doesn’t make him gay!!! What a bunch of morons!

    Report Post »  
    • FromSeaToSea
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:50pm

      3 openly gay friends of Obama are dead. Two executed and unsolved. All within 40 days of announcing his presidential run. At least one claimed a sexual relationship to Obummer. That’s an issue for most of us and for the families of the dead.

      Report Post »  
    • doomytram
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:04pm

      All right Joy. Shoot. What issue would you like to discuss. Lord knows the Obamunist, like you and Oblamer don’t want to talk issues. Shoot?

      How about Wash Po making up a story about a bully who committed a hate crime 48 years ago against a supposed gay dude that was total fabrication? Are Rubbers, the Non War on Woman, War on Hispanics? The Leftist‘s aren’t on issue, the Obmaunist.

      Any person, poor or middle class has been hurt by the Massive Increase in the size and scope of an already bloated federal gov’t. Joy, any one with anything resembling a functioning brain understands that Obama has been the biggest disaster to Capitalism in our lifetimes. Snap Stamps doubling are Obama’s greatest accomplishment. Shoot Joy?

      doomytram  
    • RightUnite
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:04pm

      Dude… You keep telling yourself that… Fool.

      Report Post »  
    • wvgirl
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:14pm

      What a raging HETEROPHOBE!! WOW! I‘ll bet you’re a workaphobe, Ameriphobe, constitutionphobe, and religiphobe, as well! WOW!! Way to really tell somebody “how the cow ate the cabbage” eh? Are you as non-plussed with my name-calling as I am with your name-calling? Get over yourself and learn some bigger and more important words. Ouch, ouch. Whaaaaa. Mommeeeeee, he called me a name. BAAAWL, SNIFFLE, SNIFFLE.

      Report Post »  
    • P C BE DAMNED
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:01pm

      Joysfool
      Oh you really got us out here. Oh the shame and pain you have brought on us all. Fool are you 12 years old.

      Report Post » P C BE DAMNED  
    • Tallaron
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:55pm

      Gays marry….for a cover, for children, for pleasing family so they seem normal and many other things.

      Report Post »  
    • johnpaulkuchtajr
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:41pm

      To Fromseatoshiningsea,

      Tell the folks to google : Obama, Larry Sinclair, Don Young, Rev. Wright, “Man’s Country,” Larry Bland.

      If you get through all those stories and still don’t understand why Obama has such a “sensitivity” to gay issues, look me up and I‘ll ’splain it to you!

      Report Post »  
    • binge_thinker
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 10:11pm

      While you show the exceptional reason why moral debate is impossible with militant homosexuals and regressive liberals, you failed miserably in portraying any reason in your answers. They are simply mindless rhetoric based on nothingbut a silly attempt at argument with no meaning and no evidence.

      Report Post » binge_thinker  
    • MCDAVE
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 8:21pm

      Obama being Gay won’t set well with the silent majority …If it damages his re-election chances its a good thing..

      Report Post »  
  • doomytram
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:35pm

    Romney / Rand Paul 2012 Ron Paul for Sec. of Treasury

    Ears and Rahm Can Run Chicago further into to the ground or Run for King of Indonesia for all anyone cares.

    Report Post » doomytram  
  • lukerw
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:19pm

    RAND Paul… for President!

    Report Post » lukerw  
    • blanco5
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:31pm

      Ron Paul for president and Rand Paul for VP. America would be great again!

      Report Post »  
    • lukerw
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 6:35pm

      @BLANC…
      I do not want Ron… near Foreign Policy!

      Report Post » lukerw  
    • Chet Hempstead
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:08pm

      Rand is just Ron without charisma or experience. I can’t imagine many people would vote for him.

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on May 13, 2012 at 11:31am

      LUKRW Ron would be great with foreign policy..he understands what is going on and swept Bachman under the table..he proved her a sensationalist..and also proved her of immense exageration..we need a cool head like Ron’s..someone who will get us out of wars and not executive order us to death..he would go to war ..but would leave the decision in the hands of Congress. get in ..win and get out …isn’t that what the Constitution is about? God says those standing with Israel will be blessed..so are we blessed with Barrack Obama? How about we gave more money and still do to Israel’s enemies than to Israel? How about when Israel wanted to attack Iran..Bush refused permission? Does that sound like we support Israel? Sounds to me like we control Israel..Tell me again..are we blessed? Are we the power we once were? Why is it we are importing 11 thousand muslims a month and tens of thousands by executive order..Does China stay at war..do any of these other countries do that? How much expense is too much..when do we start building up America in place of other countries.. Ron wants to stop all of this foreign financial aide..It is not bilblical to give away borrowed money..we are not to rob Peter to pay Paul.

      Report Post »  
  • FromSeaToSea
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:17pm

    WHERE DID OBUMMER SAY HE GREW UP?

    “Gaiety is the most outstanding feature of the Soviet Union. ” Joseph Stalin

    Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:02pm

      LOL, I almost fell out of my chair laughing. I had forgotten that statement and I have it one of those books regarding odd quotes.
      This Stalin quote fits our ‘fearless’ leader to a T:
      Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
  • FromSeaToSea
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:12pm

    BARACK’s GAY PAST – COVERED UP BY THE MEDIA –

    1. Rahm & Barack – past memberships to Man’s Country Chicago (gay bath house) link below
    2. 3 openly gay members of Trinity United Church die within 30 days of Barack announcing His 2008 bid.- 2 are shot to death.- l was the choir director for the church – members are afraid to talk about this – media coverup – murders unsolved
    3. multiple men have claimed a gay relationship to Barack in the past. – media coverup.
    4. Death Threat – Chicago Police Dept. Warn Victim’s Mom – Mom leaving Chicago
    5. Obama’s teen mentor – Frank Marshall Davis – Davis was a bisexual per self professed writings.
    GOOGLE AND STUDY THIS FOR YOURSELF.

    Link to Man’s Country Chicago –

    http://manscountrychicago.com/about/about.html
    (Minor Warning: shirtless young boys)

    Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:49pm

      Who else would marry Mochelle? If you weren’t gay .. it would push you over the edge.

      Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:04pm

      CATB, I still say that cow was artificially inseminated.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • johnpaulkuchtajr
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 9:51pm

      Yep, I went to the site. I also read stories about what day Barry tended to show-up and what he liked.

      Something about older white men? I forget….

      Report Post »  
  • Living In NYC
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:11pm

    Rand I love you, but Obama has had this stance since the late 1990′s! This guy just plays the crowd and when he needs some cash or support he plays to another special interest group.

    This nothing more then a way to get money and support, he has always believed it! This guy hasn’t change a stance since his twenties..he just goes into a closet if it does play well with the masses and when he thinks it will play he comes out the closet with it!

    Report Post » Living In NYC  
  • Baikonur
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:09pm

    I am going to follow Blaze tradition and comment on a political figure’s appearance rather than the content of what they are saying (not that Rand’s drivel merits as content):

    Unlike his clean cut and cute Dad Ron, Aqua Buddha looks like a heavy drinker and a sloppy thinker/talker.

    Report Post » Baikonur  
    • Steelhead
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:24pm

      give him a break he is just representing his constituents , I blame them

      Report Post » Steelhead  
    • 65Mustang
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:35pm

      @Baikonur…you must be an Obama illiterate.

      Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on May 12, 2012 at 7:18pm

      65MUSTANG, Nah, BAIKONUR is just following his Huffpo tradition, not that of The Blaze.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
  • Smokey_Bojangles
    Posted on May 12, 2012 at 5:08pm

    Barack and Rahm in a Chicago bath house could get “Gayer.”

    Report Post » Smokey_Bojangles  
1 2 3

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love