How Would Liberals Feel if Republicans Lied About a Hot Button Social Issue?

[aus10]

Originally Posted by keepingquiet

Freudian slip much

LOL Yep!

[eddiehaskell]

Originally Posted by LS Jaun

Isn't he allowed to change his mind on the topic several times?

Haha - I love your logic.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Dole-McCain Republican

I really think that in the long-run the liberals will regret the way they attained victory in the gay marriage debate. The truth of the matter (much to my disappointment) was that public attitudes would eventually change, and the public would condone homosexuality and--more generally--gay marriage.

This is the same argument Southern apologist use when they say talk about slavery, it is wrong in both situations because the opinion of others does not matter to another individuals rights.

However, social liberals were very impatient with this change, and felt that "the ends justified the means." To that end, they instructed the Democratic establishment politicians (from Obama on down) to deliberately lie to the people and say that they were opposed to gay marriage (back when the majority of Americans were opposed to it). Then, at almost precisely the exact moment a majority of people supported gay marriage, the entire Democratic establishment "evolved" and claimed to have had a genuine change of heart on the issue. In the meantime, Obama & company packed the judiciary with socially liberal judges who overturned voter-approved bans on gay marriage; this had the effect of shifting public opinion in favor of gay marriage at a far faster rate than would otherwise have happened........

This is absolutely false on 3 fronts.

1. The majority of the marriage ruling judges across the country have been republican appointees, not Democratic.

2. The Supreme court is majority Republican appointed.

3. Presidents appoint judges who they believe fall in line with their values, that is no secret, and republicans have already done it, so your argument that republicans will "Learn the lesson" is false on multiple levels.

If any liberal thinks that this lesson is lost on establishment Republicans, he or she is sorely mistaken. There is no excuse for this sickening deception (regardless of how you feel on any issue), but you can expect clever Republican politicians to employ similar tactics in the future. Personally, I predict that some socially conservative Republicans--in an attempt to woo women voters in blue and purple states--will pretend to be a lot more centrist on the issue of abortion than they actually are. As a matter of fact, we saw this in last year's CO Senate race when Cory Gardner walked back his previous support of a personhood amendment. (This reminded me so much of how candidate Obama claimed to support traditional marriage and retracted a 1996 statement in support of gay marriage.) Democrats should get ready for a much larger scale deception on the part of social conservatives, now that the liberals managed to win the gay marriage debate in the most underhanded and dishonest way possible. And after the conservatives have lied and packed the judiciary with staunch right-wing judges, I will feel zero sympathy for the liberal Democrats because it was their idol--Barack Obama--who showed us all how to deceive the voters.

That last paragraph doesnt even make sense.

Not only are you arguing(previously) that the courts made the right decision, but you are now saying that you would be ok with a politically driven reversal. Why would you think that is ok. Are you so political that you would negate your own personal beliefs for the sake of a political victory for your own side ????

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Dole-McCain Republican

It would be fine if Obama genuinely changed his view, but that is not what happened. In the Time Magazine article that I linked to earlier (did you bother to read that?), it was mentioned that Obama already supported gay marriage in 1996, but then said otherwise when he ran for president. His longtime political adviser, David Axelrod, even said that it was a blatant lie on Obama's part.

This isnt about Obama, your argument was about Presidential judicial appointments.....And the truth of the matter is that President Obama Only appointed 2 Supreme Court Justices, and while I have not followed all of the lower cases, I know that the majority that I did follow were Bush and Reagan appointees.

That was your point, and it was wrong(at least based on SCOTUS, if anyone has a break down on the other 30 lower cases, post please)

[Old Gringo]

Originally Posted by Dole-McCain Republican

"No, I don't think so. Why would anyone regret campaigning for equal rights. And how was it underhanded. I have no statistics but I would guess that no one 30 and under cares about who marries who. It's the older generation who cares."

It was underhanded because Obama repeatedly said when campaigning for president that marriage was between one man and one woman, and then said he "evolved" when the majority of the public was in support of the issue (despite the fact that David Axelrod recently admitted that Obama blatantly lied about his position while campaigning, and despite the fact that Obama said in 1996 that he supported gay marriage).

If the social liberals won but were honest with the American people, I would still be upset over the ruling. However, I am far more upset over the fact that the homosexuals and their allies used deception to get what they wanted. This type of deception wasn't even necessary, since (as you pointed out), the younger generation condones homosexuality; had the Democrats been honest about their position on gay marriage, all that would have happened was that gay marriage would have been legalized around 2025.

So, all you need to do to advance your argument is to show the federal law that Obama supports that establishes gay marriage.

Otherwise you're barking at Obama for an action he played no substantive part in.